Unlock the speeding ticket matrix

Traffic tickets are the bread and butter revenue generators for many cities, having almost nothing to do with safety.

While that may be great for people who are employed for the city, it is terrible for those of us that try to earn our own livings as it forces us to work even more just to get by.

If you think that I am incorrect in these statements, one has only to follow the money.

Take a look at the Washington State Infraction Penalties Remittance Guide published by the washington courts.

Within this document, JIS means "Judicial Information System" and PSEA means "Public Safety and Education Act". Just looking over the above document shows quite clearly that the fines and fees are revenue. The cities, counties, and states are all profiting from each and every infraction issued...at the expense of everyone else.

Simply reading documents readily available from your state should confirm this. For instance, look at how the King County metro area creates new legislation to make more revenue as openly stated in the 2009 District Court Budget Reductions document.

"District Court Proposes to implement a traffic safety program that will add two red light cameras in unincorporated king county and generate $100,000 in revenue."

"District Court expects an additional $25,000 in Traffic Infraction Penalty Revenues from citations issued by Washington State Patrol officers in High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Hot Lanes as a result of state legislation implemented in 2008."

Yes folks, it is about getting your money...not keeping us safe.

I once believed, like most people who go through the public schools, that traffic tickets were issued to law breakers.

Today, most people I know still believe this, though it is provably false.

Law deals with two things: Contract and Crime

Contract requires at least two parties, each giving the other consideration, one offering the contract, and the other accepting it. From what I "knew" at the time, a traffic violation was not something dealing with contract.

Not being contract, I had assumed that such tickets were crimes.

However, crimes have essential elements, things which must be alleged in a complaint and served via a summons by an uninterested third party.

Infractions are simply statements of violation of statutes or ordinances written up and given to people by agents of the very state that is supposedly accusing them.

They are not summonses.
They are not verified complaints.
They are given by interested parties.
They do not allege any cause of action.

If traffic tickets were crimes, they would be completely unlawful...meaning that every officer issuing them was a law breaker and every judge hearing them was a law breaker as well.

Attempting to beat an traffic infraction by using the false assumption that they are some kind of lawful process is simply asking for trouble...though it can be done.

The reason that you can beat them by treating them as something they are not is because those using infractions for revenue generation typically try to maintain the appearance that they are based upon lawful process...which means that if you properly attack the evidence ( notice of infraction ) on technical terms, the judge will play along and dismiss the charge against you in most cases.

Most of the commercial processes out there on the net which I have looked at involve doing exactly that. Researching court cases, figuring out exactly what evidence is required for particular types of things, attacking the evidence, and then getting the ticket thrown out due to lack of evidence.

I have reviewed a few of these and put together a comparative review as well:

• Case Dismissed


• Beat the System


• Pay No Ticket


• The comparative review of all three

Please keep in mind that at the time I wrote these, I was under the mistaken assumption that speeding tickets and other traffic infractions were actually considered to be crimes.

All three of the above referenced traffic ticket solutions are useful because traffic court magistrates must maintain the pretense that speeding tickets are about violations of law.

Properly attack the evidence with the above systems and you stand a good chance of getting your ticket dropped.

However, a traffic court "judge" is well within his right to declare you guilty at his whim.

One day, when thinking about law related matters and researching infractions, I realized that the procedure for courts of limited jurisdiction here in the area commonly called Washington State listed ones options, as stated on the back of the ticket, a bit differently than the ticket itself did.

Early in the rules for infractions, it was stated that they would use the civil rules and only override them when there was conflict between them.

Under civil rules, one responds to a complaint and summons by filing either a motion of some type or an answer.

Under the infraction rules it states:

Alternatives
and then goes on to list the three options on the back of the ticket.

Noticing that "Alternatives" does not equal "Available Options", it occurred to me that the three choices on the back of the ticket were alternatives to normal civil process, meaning that instead of (a) paying up, (b) complaining and paying up, or (c) requesting a hearing to contest the infraction, one could (d) file a motion or answer.

So, I helped my wife to file a motion to dismiss for failure to file timely when my wife got a speeding ticket...as the officer did not file the ticket within the time specified by law.

The judge of course ignored it and while no judgment was issued, the case was not dismissed either. Eventually, after I was in the process of getting it dismissed because they refused payment she got scared of their threats and paid the ticket.

At first, I presumed that the judge was breaking the law. However, not being my own ticket I lacked proper standing to fight it, appeal it, and go after the judge...which was probably a good thing as my frame of reference was broken.

If tickets were about crimes, then using civil process ( a motion to dismiss...most likely for lack of subject matter jurisdiction by way of lack of standing of the plaintiff, lack of a damaged party, lack of injury, and lack of intent ) would work quite well...unless the system is hopelessly corrupt.

For this reason, I am fairly certain that one could get a ticket tossed out using this process...but it would be to maintain the illusion of a ticket being lawful process.

Eventually, after having explored both the civil and criminal areas and found that something still was not right, I resumed my research into infractions.

After a time, I started learning about the difference between Man and Person as well as the idea of political status.

With some further research, I thought I had finally nailed things down...though I knew I lacked a few of the pieces as of yet and kept looking for them.

Basically, I had thought that a traffic infraction was issued because (a) one was in a car which had been registered...converting it into a "Motor Vehicle", subject to the DMV and/or (b) one had gotten a drivers license, converting oneself from a "traveller" to a "driver".

Properly presented with careful questioning and evidence, I have no doubt that one could prevail from this standpoint, though one would still be a bit off base. By junking the title to the car, giving public notice that the car was your own property and not property of the state you registered it in, and by voiding the drivers license, one would technically be traveling in their own private property and not "Driving" or "Operating" a "Motor Vehicle".

The information that I was lacking, which I could find no proof of, was the specific contract showing both of these things.

The interesting thing about this method is that by properly correcting your status and voiding all unwanted licenses/registrations/etc., one can gain proper standing to sue for damages when people start making mistakes in their process.

Anywise, being unable to find the specific connection, I kept searching and eventually stumbled across something quite shocking one day while researching something completely different...

A far better way to beat your speeding tickets is to learn how law works and use your right to due process of law.

You might scoff at the idea, thinking that law is too complex and only a trained lawyer could possibly understand it.

If that is what you are thinking, think again.

Our system of law is much simpler than you might believe.

The only reason we believe it to be difficult is because we are lead to believe that. Between no education on law in school, televisions showing everyone running out to get a lawyer, and courts often appointing people one automatically, there is a concerted effort to keep the truth out of our hands. We are a great human resource so long as we are ignorant.

For infractions that do not involve harm to others:

Infractions where no one is harmed and a breach of the peace is not claimed are commonly called civil infractions or non-criminal traffic infractions. Depending on where you live, the name may be different, but one fact remains the same: No one was harmed.

The truth is so simple that it repels the mind...

You do not have to receive a traffic infraction!

To know what that means, you have only to know the legal definition of receive.

TO RECEIVE (Bouvier's Law Dictionary, sixth edition):
Voluntarily to take from another what is offered.

From the "Washington Administrative Code":
RCW 7.80.080 Response to Notice

(1) Any person who receives a notice of civil infraction shall respond to such notice as provided in this section within fifteen days of the date of the notice.

Substitute the legal definition of the word receive in:

Any person who voluntarily takes a notice of civil infraction from another shall respond to such notice as provided in this section within fifteen days of the date of notice.

So, the big question is, "Why are you voluntarily taking the offered notice of infraction?"

Once you know what is going on, the answer is suddenly pretty obvious. Do not voluntarily take a notice of infraction from the officer. If he demands that you take it or go to jail, you might place your hands out face up and let him drop it in your hands. Then proceed to return the infraction to the court with a note stating that you did not voluntarily accept the infraction and that the officer dropped it into your upturned hands and left. As it is their property, you are returning it to them without dishonor.

I guess I could be wrong, but it seems pretty straight forward here. The only caveat I can think of is that you better know how to avoid voluntarily taking the infraction, how to give it back in a timely manner, and how to bring suit against anyone who brings process against you for refusing to accept the infraction.

For infractions which do involve harm to others:

If you are looking for a great course that you can complete within a couple of weeks by only working on it for an hour a day, look no further than Jurisdictionary®. It will help you greatly when you are issued a traffic citation for something that does harm someone else, though it is completely unnecessary if you are being charged with a civil infraction where no one was harmed.

I picked up Jurisdictionary a while back and was simply amazed at how clearly and quickly it lays out the entire civil process. However, it does not apply to infractions which are not actionable.

The video itself covers enough so that you will know what any lawyer you decide to hire should be doing and is well worth the $219 price tag all by itself.

Add in the audio and pamphlets that come with it and you will have everything you need to fight off various and sundry tickets, fines, and fees.

Download a copy of the rules of civil, criminal, infraction, and evidence for your state and you can then use them to do things that will leave others stunned...including lawyers and judges.

If you get this program and take the time to finish it, you will learn:

How to initiate a lawsuit.

What to do when a lawsuit is filed against you.

What to do after you answer the suit and how to go about getting it dismissed or settled without ever going to trial.

How to impeach evidence and witnesses.

How to force judges to do what they are supposed

And a lot more

A quick summary of how the law works:

A complaint is filed in a court

Motions are made to beat the complaint

A response and/or counterclaim is made

Discovery is used to try and prove or disprove the claim

If discovery cannot resolve the complaint, trial ensues

Even if you get a lawyer, you should know the law!
If you do not know how the law works, how do you know that your lawyer is not simply taking your money and failing to do his job? You don't!

There are two reasons the vast majority of us fail when dealing with city hall:

1. We are completely ignorant of what the law is and how it works.

2. We are afraid of those running the system.

Most of us hear the word law and get a vague idea of justice and equality, but never bother to go beyond that.

Those who are forced to do so by being in the receiving end of an unjust law tend to find themselves giving up and feeling like there is nothing they can do.

Propaganda:
Law is vast and complicated and that without spending years studying it and getting a juris doctorate degree, we cannot possibly understand it.

You have to receive the speeding ticket handed to you by the cop or go to jail.

Maxim of Law:
Ignorance of the law is no excuse for not knowing the law.

A maxim of law is something that is self evident when studied closely.

If the above is a maxim, then perhaps the truth is that our form of law is much simpler than we have been lead to believe.