your rights werent deprived. you had your day in court. you were found guilty and sentenced to 195 days in jail. the constitution worked perfectly.
oh man, they should have held him longer
he is certifiably INSANE
The sentence was suspended. The point is that the charge cannot be Consitutional because of estoppel and the failure to appear on subpoena by the county.
Which is but one of many deprivations of right.
MOTION QUASH CONTEMPT, ESTOPPEL
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1802288-post2836.html
Conformed face page of motion to quash, estoppel, never heard that the commissioner erroneously declared denied.
1. The following pleading is in support of the concurently filed MOTON TO QUASH PROCEEDINGS and addresses the consideratons of the equitable estoppel balencing process similar to that used with equitable estoppel as shown with, County of Orange v. Carl D. supra, 76 CA4th at 438, 90 CR2d at 447(See page 3 of MOTION TO QUASH)
2. This pleading applies the inverse balencing to County of Orange v. Carl D. in that the statement "justify any effect upon public interest" could be interpreted in this case as a negative public interest to consider respondent for charges of contempt.
3. Respondent is a proponent for an experimental medical treatment that can reduce public expenditures related to homelessness drugs, alcohol and related medical costs. By observing "justice and right to the individual", the "public interest" of this experimental treatment would have already been manifested by petitioners compliance with law and appearance under subpoena September 8, 1998 (EXHIBIT NINETEEN) by now, or, also by complying further with CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY code § 1370.4. EXHIBIT FORTY shows the director of the mental health department began complying with law by making a request to the California state Mental Health Department to administer experimental treatment respondent propose(d)s. The public and respondent have been deprived of this health care since then.
4. Respondent also intended to use the medical information commercially, an element of equitable estoppel lodged inside the major promissory estoppel relating to the medical aspects. EXHIBIT FORTY-TWO shows the respondent attempting to gain the response of the State Department of mental health to the County of Mental Health by a Freedom Of Information Act Request wherein the petitioner did not respond. Granting respondents motion will have some positive effect on public interest.
5. The fact that respondent has sought the medical information, compliance to develop a treatment, perhaps more appropriate than those existing for alcohol and drug recovery, sex offenders, and other disorders, or acting in a way inherently benefiting public interests (SEE EXHIBIT FORTY) and that this "public interest" aspect alone perhaps constitutes "outweighing" the "frustration" (a debt that would have been paid if the petitioner had followed laws) in the "equitable estoppel balancing process".
PRAYER
6. Respondent prays for consideration of the potential positive public interests of the granting of his motion to quash the proceedings or OSC of contempt.
Date;
pro per respondent, Christopher A. Brown,
Of course deprivations of Constitutional right will not be noticed just as the
violation of law that enabled the deception conducted by guliani and a NYS superior court judge.
Agents with no evidence are always trying to change the subject from the core of the towers which was CONCRETE. The east concrete wall of WTC 1 toppling into the empty core area.
(from irresponsible )
