Talk:US Criminal Law

Due Process
Either this section has some factual errors or it is written in an odd manner. I have removed this because I believe it to be misleading and NPOV in its current form. --Cspurrier 21:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC) "Due Process is not a ceiling to a defendants rights in a criminal process in which a defendant is accused of a crime; it is a floor of guaranteed fairness and all diligence due to protect the interest of an accused or of a defendant. Due process of law can be established in any original claim of a defendant. Due process of law, is always fair and unbiased, when a defendant or his attorney is first made aware than any unfair advantage is weighed on the side of Guilt; an objection should be made for the court record, and a Demand for Fact of Law should follow if the court does not or will not recognized an element that is not fairs. DUE PROCESS although ficticously listed as a set of guarantees, is never limited to those guarantees but is denied when any unfair advantage is given the state or plaintiff.  A study of supreme court opinions will validate this addition.  THe above limited processes are fowl and contempt if the defendant does not know that he alone can recognize any unfair element. This is constitional law and it overrides any legal president and allows all fairness to be given to a defendant. To deny this is to ask for a dismissal on bias contempt. When the law officer is on the stand and says he knows you are guilty; he, usurps the honor of his position to an unfair advantage. It is impossible to know that you are guilty when you certain are not, untill a verdict is reached."

I concur with below comments. I find the basic outline of this whole text flawed and of little use to the layman. I suggest just reading the US Constitution and asking for the Public Defender.

Innovative defenses
I have never heard of any of these defenses being used successful, or even being presented seriously by any lawyer. If you can find a cite for any of them, we can re-add them. These “defenses” work off flawed understandings of US law and using them will only seriously harm your case and probably get you a contempt charge. --Cspurrier 21:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I have seen one instance in which a defendant's insistance in maintaining this sort of 'defense' over several court appearances despite judicial admonishments eventually resulted in the involuntary psychiatric hospitalization of the defendant. --198.144.137.145 12:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

"Jurisdistion of Subject Matter is a valid defense. 1) Subject Matter is limited to the Prosecutors BIASED Opinion. Subject matter that lacks important information because a State Welfare Attorney Failed to Prepare for the Trial, and your case record from the Clerks office is tainted or Painted.  If there are not several document filed from your attorney, then he has become incompetant defence and you must request other representation.  Subject matter Jurisdiction is void when the court is   prejudiced against the case already.  When you are not allowed to ask questions of the Judge and he has not really benefited you with a prudent understanding of the Crimes and accsations to you level of understanding then the court is moot until he is able to cause you to understand.  IF he decided to check NOT GUILTY because your 15 minutes are almost up and you do not admit to understanding any crime or accusation as it would apply to your understanding, then ASK him if his act ( the act of checking NOT GUILTY just to get you through the line ) is a JUDICIAL DICISION. If it is then you are not guilty and you are free to go. If he reponds not, tell him you are not willing to accept his plea unless he is will to be supeonoed to your trial as a witness to your defence. He cannot Constitutionally enter a plea without your admission that you understand all the charges. If there is no attorney with you, ask him to dismiss your charges on the account that you have rights to counsel; but your counsel has not prepared you for any step of the legal process.

Jurisdiction of COURT? There are 3 courts that try cases in the United States. The Criminal Court, The Civil Court, and the Courts of Admiralty Marinetime Law. In order to know how to defend you self, you must ask which jurisdiction does this court have. If he says crimal court, ask him why is the Admiralty Marinetime Flag in his courtroom. Look, it is the almost US FLAG, but has gold trim around it. HE may threaten to charge to with contempt; the prosecutor may object; you camly say that you object to the Prosecutors Attempt to Deprive you of the rights to the Courts of the United States. "I must know which laws to use to defend myself." Please answer, Is this civil and criminal, statutory, or Military."

Ask for a continuance so that you may have the benefit of counsel that is more highly trained and may now if you have committed a Statory Offense or A Common Law Crime. Start Studying and know your rights and Mail a Motion to the Court to Drop all Charges or move your courtcase to a Jurisdiction of Marinetime Law. Remind them then that you must be appointed an attorney who practices Criminal Defense In the Washington DC area.

Conflict of Interest and Bias Possibility? Ask if the Prosecutor is Paid by the State who is charging you, even a Resident of the Same State; of which your are the People. Ask if the Judge is Paid by the State, and if the Appointed Attorney is paid by the State. Ask if the Jury is paid by the state; object to proceeding any further if a public audience is not in the court; you have the right to a public trial; demand one, or at least have it televised."