And your motion to dismiss is denied. >> How many days does the prosecutor have to answer my uh motion for demand for uh motion for challenge of uh jurisdiction that I submitted to the clerk. And I've uh served everybody all parties. How long did he does he have cuz that that happened January 6th. >> Hey, what's going on guys? Welcome back to no one >> [music] >> is above the law. Today, we have another case of a sovereign citizen. It seems like that's all has been popping up lately on this channel. And >> [music] >> the sovereign citizen that we have here in this particular proceeding has truly met his match. If you have not heard of Judge Kristen D. Simmons out of the state of Michigan, well, you are about to find out one judge that does not play. >> Turning to the record in the matter of the people of the city of Lansing versus Rambo L, file numbers 22 L2761882881883. Council appearance, please. >> Matt Staples on behalf of the city of Lansing. >> Okay, and uh Rambo L is present. Do you have an attorney, sir? >> I'm here by special appearance. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Staples, my understanding is that you're moving to dismiss these. >> Uh just the um failure to display ops, Your Honor. I did check the Secretary of State. His license is valid and he did show me that license um and that he does have it in his possession. So, that the misdemeanor charge would be dismissed. >> Okay, and there's no offer on the expired plate and the sealed signal? >> Uh not at this time, Your Honor. I believe Mr. L is planning on contesting those charges. >> Is that correct, Mr. Al? >> Yes. >> Okay, we'll set them for a hearing. February 14th at 9:30. Any additional matters for the record, counsel? >> Nothing for the city, Your Honor. >> Okay, you're all set, Mr. Al. We'll see you on February 14th. Okay, is this Al Rambo or Rambo Al? You're muted. You have an attorney, sir? >> No, I'm here by special appearance. >> Okay, I'll put you in the private meeting room with the city attorney. >> You Your Honor, we've actually already met with Mr. Rambo Al before. He was requesting a formal hearing on these two files. >> Okay, sounds good. Formal hearings will be set for in-person appearance. >> Actually, I filed a motion. January 6th, this when it went unanswered. I would like the court to dismiss this matter. >> Okay, your motion to dismiss is denied. >> How many days does the prosecutor have to answer my uh motion for demand for uh motion for challenge of uh jurisdiction that I submitted to the clerk. And I've uh served everybody all parties. How long did he does he have cuz that that happened January 6th. >> I see it's a motion to show authority. >> And also demand a demand for dismissal, lack of jurisdiction, fair failure to introduce evidence of an injury in fact. challenges jurisdiction of the court to prosecute. That was filed January 6th. >> We only have one motion attached to the file. I don't see the other motions that you're referencing, sir. >> Um it's time stamped by the court. I have it right here. >> I see a motion to show authority, which the court has denied. Um and then there was a memo that was attached. There was not any other motion. >> [snorts] >> I I I don't read the Zoom. >> It's filed with the clerk. Everybody was served. >> Mr. Staples, did you get a copy of the motion he's referencing? >> Uh I see a copy of the motion to show authority in our file. Um I don't recognize it as any sort of valid motion or pleadings. Um but I see a copy of it in our file. >> Agreed. And that that's the same the court has. It's a motion to show authority. The other motions that he's referencing was not properly filed with this court or served as the court Neither the court nor Mr. Staples' office is in receipt of it. The motion to show authority was denied and is not in proportion with the Michigan court rules. Um it does cite, however, Luke 11:46, the King James version, um Luke 11:52, um as well as some other uh articles and treaties. But nevertheless, as indicated by uh Mr. Staples from Office of City Attorney, this is not a a lawful or appropriately filed motion, and for that reason it was denied before this court. >> But we will I'd like to challenge your I'd like to challenge jurisdiction right now. I have the right to travel. >> motion with the court under the Michigan court rules to challenge jurisdiction. But what we won't do is entertain motions under the King James version of the Bible, okay? >> That was That was a different motion you're referring to. That was the motion to swear the burden. >> We don't have the other motion, sir. So, you can file that motion. It's just we don't have it. I don't know why we only have one motion that we don't have the other one you're referencing. So, you'd have to file that and serve it on the city attorney. We'll give you time to do that. I'm going to set both of these up for 30 minutes. >> I can't tell I You're telling me I don't have the right to challenge jurisdiction right now? I want to challenge jurisdiction right now. >> You can file a You can file a motion for challenging the jurisdiction, sir. >> I can't do a verbal motion? >> No, you cannot. >> telling me I don't have the right to do a verbal motion? >> You You You don't You don't have a right to do that. You're going to file it in writing and you're going to serve it properly on the parties that you're filing it against, okay, sir? March 14th at 10:30 in person at the court will be the the date for the formal hearing and then uh we'll hear any arguments on motions if necessary. Do you have any questions today, Mr. L? Okay. Well, then you're all set. Thank you. Okay, have You can have a seat. Thank you. Ladies, the date and time set for a formal hearing I have with one witness on Zoom. Counsel, you can proceed. >> Officer Vanderwerf, would you uh state your name for the records, please? >> How do you want to call him? Let me >> I I'm sorry. >> Sorry, man. No worries. Vanderwerf, can you uh raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give is the truth and the whole truth under the penalty of perjury? >> Yes, Judge. So, I was traveling southbound on King uh when I observed a pickup truck in front of me that was changing lanes failing to use a signal. So, at that time I activated my overhead lights on the vehicle to initiate a traffic stop. And then I made contact with the driver who was later identified as a Rambo L. In our contact, he ended up handing me a piece of paper. At brief glance, when I looked at the piece of paper, uh it appeared to have uh what I believe was certain MCL codes uh that the subject may have typed onto the piece of paper. When I had asked him for uh driver's license or identification, he was not really very cooperative. I also don't believe I was provided any insurance. Uh at that time I decided to issue him citation for failing to signal changing lanes and failing to display a valid license and then also the license plate when through the system was expired. >> Mr. L, did you want to question the witness? >> Uh yes. Um I the document that you were referring to uh it's a travel document. I was uh showing you I was traveling versus driving. I tried to explain that to you. And then you have you held me on the side of road for approximately an hour. Um I requested that a supervisor because they might better understand what I was doing and you never provided that for me. Is that correct? >> That's actually incorrect because the reason that you were held on the stop for as long as you were is cuz I was waiting for a supervisor. So, when I realized the supervisor was not there, I contacted him by phone, at which time he said he was delayed. And when I came back up to the traffic stop, I did ask if you wanted to wait further for um a sergeant and I don't believe that you did and then you drove off when you were free to go. >> Yes. Is it correct that I was held on the road for approximately an hour waiting for this whole um encounter to end? >> I do not remember if it was an hour specifically, but I do remember that the time length was probably I would say probably close to that at the very least. >> Well, it was an hour and it caused me to be late for my son's banquet and the uh reason and I never got to speak to the supervisor. That's all the questions I had. >> Okay, any redirect? >> No redirect, Your Honor. >> Okay, any additional witnesses today? >> None from the city. >> Okay, um Mr. Olin, you calling any witnesses today or did you want to give your own testimony? >> Uh I would like to uh I have something that I I have a defense. My motion. >> Okay, well, you filed a motion? >> Yeah, I filed a motion, served the across the city attorney's >> motion. >> Um [clears throat] it was filed uh it was mailed February 18th. >> You filed a motion and mailed it February 18th. Did you serve a copy >> to the to the clerk of the courts and also to the city attorney's office. >> Did you receive any motion, sir? >> Your Honor, we did receive a motion. Uh it did not have any hearing dates stated on it. We had no timetable for a response. I would be happy to respond to the motion on the record orally or provide the court with briefing if they would like. >> didn't get a copy of any motion from in February. >> I sent it to the clerk. >> Yeah, typically when the affidavit is attached to the file, I I don't have a copy of any motion. >> Uh well, I did my due diligence. I sent it a copy to him. He has his. >> don't know that you did your due diligence because when you file a motion, you to get a hearing date for that motion. And so >> Who's supposed to give me a hearing? I'm not >> You got to get the hearing date from the clerk's office. >> [clears throat] >> Clerk's office? >> Yeah. >> So, why they give me one? >> Did you contact them for a hearing date? >> I contacted them, yeah. >> And and asked for a hearing date for your motion? >> and I asked them when was my hearing. They confirmed that it was today. >> For your motion? >> And I I I asked did I have a hearing date? And they said >> And you do have a hearing date, but that's not what I asked you. Did you ask them did you have a hearing date for your motion? >> For my motion? >> Yes. >> They didn't they didn't tell me, but I did provide to him a order for the motion that gave him 21 days to respond. >> Okay, you can make your motion before the court because I don't have a copy. You can make it now orally. >> Okay. Well, um now comes the beneficiary for Rambo L, defending the heir hereby special appearance, not submitting to the court's jurisdiction, hereby moves the court to strike and dismiss the complaint filed by the officer uh Zenderbar. Am I pronouncing that right? Sorry if I'm not. For lack of ratification and commencement, no uh corpus delicti, no plaintiff, lack of jurisdiction, personal personal jurisdiction. Um Christina Hat Semmes being appointed trustee, prosecutor being appointed as co-trustee, I, Rambo L, an executor and beneficiary of her said said account. I also um I filed a declaration of non- citizenship nationality because I've done a name change. Who my appointing authorities are the United States District of Columbia Corporation in volume 20 uh Corpus Juris Section 18 means 1785, we find United States government as a foreign corporations with respect to the states. Um since the corporation is fictitious, is a fictitious person, it can't see, speak, smell, or touch itself. It's a fictional It's a fiction in the real world. It needs a conducting trans-meaning utility allegiance or some sort of connection to a fiction fictional person. Constitutional Amendment number one, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion prohibiting and exercise thereof or abridging freedom of speech or right of press or right of people peacefully assemble petition the government for redress of grievances. Um, yeah, uh, number five, constitutional amendment, the right of people should be carried secured in their person, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall be issued upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place searched or persons things to be seized. And then number seven, constitutional amendment, suits of at common law where value of controversy exceeding $20, the right of the jury trial shall be preserved and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States according to the rules of common law. I asked for a jury trial and get that. Rambo Wells, a man, people, but not a person. I was not operating in commerce, nor was I driving or nor was I driver on the road for travel. A driver is an employee uh, transporting goods or passengers. Rambo was just merely traveling in my private property. >> This is where we get right into one of the most familiar sovereign citizen arguments, right? We've heard all of these same things before. He is trying to make a distinction between driving and traveling, the classic, [music] right? The classic argument by claiming that because he was not engaged in commerce, he was not actually a driver. But family, that does not address what this case is actually about. The officer testified that he was operating a vehicle on a public roadway >> [music] >> and cited him for failing to signal and having an expired plate. Just because this guy, Rambo L, >> [music] >> is calling himself a traveler instead of a driver, does not make those traffic laws disappear. They're not going anywhere. Accountability is key. This situation, the >> [music] >> mistake you made or if it was intentional, whatever, it has to be dealt with. And notice how much time is being spent arguing terminology instead of presenting evidence that actually disputes what the officer says happened. >> Here are some examples of my Supreme Court constitutional defenses. Number one, case number [clears throat] one, right to travel is part of the liberty where where citizen cannot be deprived of due process under the Fifth Amendment, Kent versus Dulles, 357 US 116 125. Case number two, I have the right to travel freely and unencumbered pursuant to Shapiro versus Thompson, 394 US P 618. That right is so basic, it doesn't even need to be mentioned. State of Michigan arbitrarily and erroneously converted my right into a privilege and issued a license and a fee for Murdock versus Pennsylvania, 319 US 105. Supreme Court talks everything, says that no state can convert it secure liberty into a privilege and issue a license and fee for. Case number four, Shuttleworth versus Birmingham, Alabama. It shows that I can ignore license and engage and engage in a right with immunity. Case number five, Marbury versus Madison, 5 US 137 shows that any law in violation of con of any law in violation of the Constitution is null and void. Case number six, Shuttleworth versus Birmingham, 3 373 US 6262 says I may not ignore the license and fee and engage and engage with the right with immunity. That means you can't punish me. And United States versus Bishop defines willful willfulness as an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty cast on through the law with a more with a more to certain. I submit I couldn't have been doing an a evil task. I totally followed the Constitution and Supreme Court. And Briars versus United States says it shows how the judge supposed to interpret the Constitution and it's and it's supposed to be interpreted in a favor of me. AM Jurisprudence volume 16 section 97 of the constitutional law section says it should be received as a liberal interpretation in favor of the citizen especially true with respect to those who were designated safeguard liberty and security of the citizen in regards to both persons and property. C note 31, Briars versus United States. No state may convert the liberty into a privilege, Mardock versus Pennsylvania. An appearance ticket is not a fusitary instrument. It doesn't afford jurisdiction over the defendant. People versus Gabbay, 670 New York 2D 92517. Um I was not engaged in a commercial trade trade at the time of the alleged infraction, and I do not receive the sale license is unconstitutional uh detention. Um motor vehicle means every description of a carrier drawn by uh mechanical power using commercial purposes on the highway. There's neither injury nor trespasses any trespasses. All crimes are commercial. 27 CFR 72.11, and every alleged crime has to be has to have a nature and cause and be prosecuted by the name of the people of the state. I don't have a contract with the state. I don't I don't see an injured party. I don't know why I'm here. >> Okay. Any additional uh Are there any uh >> I would like the court I would ask the court to dismiss this appeal your stated claim where relief can be granted. >> Uh the court has heard argument I'm first addressing your motion, Mr. Allen. I'm going to deny your motion as uh clearly indicated um in the response by the city, your claims would be most appropriately brought before the court of claims. And so, you can't challenge a constitutional uh uh issue in this court, okay? As it relates to the authority um and the process to bring this matter before the district court as relates to your civil infractions, you have an expired plate and a failure to signal. Um again, a jurisdiction or venue before this court is appropriate. Um this is a a situation or incident occurred in the area of South or South MLK Martin Luther King Boulevard. That's in the city of Lansing, Ingham County, state of Michigan. And so, you're subject to the laws and the ordinances of the city of Lansing, but also the laws under the Michigan Compiled Laws. Here in this district court, we are subject to the Michigan Court Rules. And so, although I gave leniency with your motion, it was not properly filed and or served, um but it does not it also does not comport with the Michigan comp- compiled laws or Michigan Court Rules. And so, for those reasons it is denied. Now, as to the civil infraction, fail- failed to signal and a expired plate from December 3rd, 2022, you have not provided any valid dispute or defense to these civil infractions. You could have appeared and showed information that demonstrated you did have a valid plate at the time or that you even have one now, which could reduce the citation, but that's not taking place. And so, I'm going to sustain both violations, the civil infractions. There's a fine of $125 on each. Okay, sir? >> My next defense was I I'm with this gun or can I say something else? >> You can say something else. I asked if you had any further defense, but you said >> My next defense would be I Michigan allows 72 hours to uh register any vehicle when it's first purchased. He never asked for anything. I never got a chance to explain myself on the side of road. >> Okay, do you have proof that you had just purchased it within 72 hours? >> I don't have the title. >> Okay, thank you, sir. Your defenses uh not meaningful if you can't provide any evidence to support that defense. Um That being said, your fine is 125 on each file. When do you intend to make payment? >> Um [clears throat] Do I have a chance to appeal this? >> You can. >> I would like to appeal. >> Okay, you want to file an appeal as a civil infraction? >> I want to file an appeal today. >> Okay, you can file a motion for reconsideration. But you need to follow Michigan Michigan court rules, okay? We don't We don't submit to the sovereign rules, okay? This is You take that to the sovereign court. >> Family, that statement from Judge Simmons >> [music] >> pretty much sums up this entire proceeding. Mr. Rambo L had every opportunity to present an actual defense [music] to these citations and did not tell you guys that Judge Simmons does not play. I got to get some more of her proceedings up here on the channel so you can really check her out in action. She does not play at all. Judge Simmons even allowed him to make his motion orally >> [music] >> after there were problems with how it was filed. She really looked out for him. But when it came down to the actual violations, Judge [music] Simmons pointed out that he never provided a meaningful defense or evidence to overcome them. Then, after being found responsible and fined $125 on each citation, he immediately wanted to appeal. And once again, Judge Simmons made it clear that if he wants to challenge the ruling, he has to do it according to the Michigan court rules. You got to follow the rules. You cannot reject the rules [music] of the court while simultaneously asking that same court to give you relief.