Jail Gets a Bad Rap

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
So where dafuq do you live now?

And yes I know how to make every kind of hash, atleast for most part. Except The Clear, and haven't had a successful rosin run yet.

Bro I hope you know, that I think you're cool. I may joke around. But I believe in a lot of the same stuff as you, but I just don't share it..


btw you look like jesus nig..

:)
I'm in Texas.

Thanks. I share it because I know a lot of people want to hear it, even if some people complain.
 

.ODanksta.

Well-Known Member
But legal information is serious in jail. It can be like money if you want it to be. People were calling me the Wizard because I could get their lawyers to come visit and get some people's charges dropped or Pre-trial release, and people would come to me telling me other people had told them to come to me. And when I was moved, people would write me letters.
the difference between me and you..

you

896d218dcb5dca66a96ca8af4d1f8d9dbbb5810f46becaf57556c6392c76b412_1.jpg


me


Wizard_of_Oz.jpg














 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
The worst part about jail is probably just the crazy people. People making shit balls and stuff. I met one guy that called himself the Oompa God, and that was probably the least crazy thing he said/did. And he was pre-trial released on a mental health bond. So they were literally like "You're a crazy person, you should be out of jail".
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
I actually still have to sue the county I was in.

A Priest told me I wasn't allowed to be Hindu, they made rules about books because I was bringing a Rig Veda places instead of a Bible, etc. but then let people with Bible's keep bringing them.

They already apologized on record and everything, so that helps the case.
 

.ODanksta.

Well-Known Member
I actually still have to sue the county I was in.

A Priest told me I wasn't allowed to be Hindu, they made rules about books because I was bringing a Rig Veda places instead of a Bible, etc. but then let people with Bible's keep bringing them.

They already apologized on record and everything, so that helps the case.
Bro your chance of winning that case is about a snow ball's chance in hell. That is unless your sister is your lawyer ;)

I hope the best for ya. But you'll spend more $$$ trying to fight that case.

How much do you think you could possibly win? lol

I've got my ass beat and lost my right ear drum from a pig boxing my ear because I requested a breathlizer. I spoke to 5 lawyers and they all said if the cell didn't have cameras I couldn't really do shit. I spoke to these lawyers the day I got out of jail. with dried blood running from my ear down my neck..

\true story
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Random, but has anyone reading this at any time now or in the future ever heard of anyone going to jail for a fingerprint? Like, cases can be helped by a fingerprint, but there are never any people in jail for finger prints. And now, if someone steals a car and later their fingerprints are found in the car, that is only circumstantial evidence and they will drop the charges.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Bro your chance of winning that case is about a snow ball's chance in hell. That is unless your sister is your lawyer ;)

I hope the best for ya. But you'll spend more $$$ trying to fight that case.

How much do you think you could possibly win? lol

I've got my ass beat and lost my right ear drum from a pig boxing my ear because I requested a breathlizer. I spoke to 5 lawyers and they all said if the cell didn't have cameras I couldn't really do shit. I spoke to these lawyers the day I got out of jail. with dried blood running from my ear down my neck..

\true story
Lol.

That is the same thing all the guards told me in jail. They literally laughed when I said I was taking it to trial.

And after my initial court appearance, the bailiff was very pissy with me for saying I was not guilty, and she said "You'll get your day in court" like sarcastic and angry, then the next day they dismissed the case. :lol:

I'll win the case. I have Fundamental Law, Written Law and Case Law on my side, and if you read Supreme Court cases, that is what really makes or breaks a case. The evidence and all that is secondary.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
And in a Civil case I will just represent myself and file indigent, so it will be free. I wouldn't represent myself in a criminal case, but for Civil, and for one like this, it is really just open and shut and I can handle it. They already admitted guilt and everything.
 

.ODanksta.

Well-Known Member
Lol.

That is the same thing all the guards told me in jail. They literally laughed when I said I was taking it to trial.

And after my initial court appearance, the bailiff was very pissy with me for saying I was not guilty, and she said "You'll get your day in court" like sarcastic and angry, then the next day they dismissed the case. :lol:

I'll win the case. I have Fundamental Law, Written Law and Case Law on my side, and if you read Supreme Court cases, that is what really makes or breaks a case. The evidence and all that is secondary.
Dude at least we agree that the system sucks balls
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
“He who represents himself has a fool for a client.” - Abraham Lincoln













That is why I wouldn't do it in a Criminal case, or in a difficult civil case. But they already admitted guilt.

I have a lawsuit in Austin Texas right now, and 2 groups of officers did different things, and one group broke the Religious Laws of Texas and the US, and the other group didn't. So I can literally just point at the two encounters.

If this was like, I was trying to prove someone broke a contract, or like a Private company did something to me and I was going after them, I would hire a lawyer. But with this, I just have to go to the court above the level it happened on, and they won't give 2 shits about the counties arguments if they violated the constitution. And any Federal court will punish a city or county, if you really have merits to your case.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
When you are suing the Government, you just use the Federal and State Constitutions and Amendments like Contacts and Clauses (that is even how the Federal courts discuss them, as Clauses). Then bring up the wording of laws, such as Religious Protection Laws, or Free Speech Laws, etc. Then show them cases where judges on the same level as them or higher than them ruled the way you are asking them to rule. And the more you have on your side the better, and with Religion, Free Speech, etc there are Landmark cases.

So you just have to prove that they broke their own rules. And use "The Law of the Land" on they ass.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Also, this can be used by anyone. It is by no means complete, and I have more to add to it still, even more written already that just isn't online yet, but it can be used to make sure that any innocent person or person who has had their Constitutional Rights violated can win their case.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B69pjF_qsNMrVW95YTdFUEcxV3c/view?usp=sharing

The part I need to add is probably the strongest part, but this version can keep a case free from Conflict of Interest, Judicial Corruption, Police Corruption, Prosecutorial Corruption, Prejudice, Bad Representation, etc.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Also,
If anyone ever gets any charges for anything, never let them just argue whether or not you did the crime. First challenge the written law. For example, if you incite a riot, do not plea guilty or not guilty, Challenge the Law with the Constitution under Rule 5.1.

Don't let them take it straight to "Did you start a riot?"
Start with:
What is a riot?
Did a riot even happen?
Was the riot started by the speech?
Is the Law Constitutional?
Is their Constitutional reasoning for such a riot?

Once those are decided, then you can start talking about guilty/not guilty, etc.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Here is an example for anyone in Texas. If you are in Texas and you are in possession of a controlled substance, many times the law will say that you have to "Willingly and knowingly" be in possession of the drug.

So for example, if you had a random illegal pill in your car, or in your pocket, it doesn't mean you have broken any laws.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
PENAL CODE


TITLE 2. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY


CHAPTER 6. CULPABILITY GENERALLY


1.07 provides that the omission is an offense or otherwise provides that he has a duty to perform the act.

Sec. 6.02. REQUIREMENT OF CULPABILITY. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person does not commit an offense unless he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence engages in conduct as the definition of the offense requires.

(b) If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, a culpable mental state is nevertheless required unless the definition plainly dispenses with any mental element.

(c) If the definition of an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, but one is nevertheless required under Subsection (b), intent, knowledge, or recklessness suffices to establish criminal responsibility.

(d) Culpable mental states are classified according to relative degrees, from highest to lowest, as follows:

(1) intentional;

(2) knowing;

(3) reckless;

(4) criminal negligence.

(e) Proof of a higher degree of culpability than that charged constitutes proof of the culpability charged.

(f) An offense defined by municipal ordinance or by order of a county commissioners court may not dispense with the requirement of a culpable mental state if the offense is punishable by a fine exceeding the amount authorized by Section 12.23.


Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

Amended by:

Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 1219 (H.B. 970), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.




Sec. 6.03. DEFINITIONS OF CULPABLE MENTAL STATES. (a) A person acts intentionally, or with intent, with respect to the nature of his conduct or to a result of his conduct when it is his conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduct or cause the result.

(b) A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to the nature of his conduct or to circumstances surrounding his conduct when he is aware of the nature of his conduct or that the circumstances exist. A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to a result of his conduct when he is aware that his conduct is reasonably certain to cause the result.

(c) A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.

(d) A person acts with criminal negligence, or is criminally negligent, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.


Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.




Sec. 6.04. CAUSATION: CONDUCT AND RESULTS. (a) A person is criminally responsible if the result would not have occurred but for his conduct, operating either alone or concurrently with another cause, unless the concurrent cause was clearly sufficient to produce the result and the conduct of the actor clearly insufficient.

(b) A person is nevertheless criminally responsible for causing a result if the only difference between what actually occurred and what he desired, contemplated, or risked is that:

(1) a different offense was committed; or

(2) a different person or property was injured, harmed, or otherwise affected.
 
Top