welcome back to the channel guys i've
got a bit of a treat for you all today a
sovereign citizen on trial for operating
a motorized bicycle on a public road
without a license and insurance in
wisconsin he claims the statute that
regulates motorized bicycles doesn't
apply to him and cites federal law and
the right to travel
this is not a criminal trial so the
court cannot appoint him a public
defender so it's either pay for a lawyer
or represent himself he chooses the
latter and makes well a pig's ear of it
especially the cross-examination of the
cop
if you want to see the trial only and
not the cringe at the beginning then
skip ahead to the 10-minute mark but i
highly recommend the cringe
right let's get into the
video want to remember investigations
but uh go into court for my 1 30 trial
oh i did forget the citations i got my
camper
you're here for the 1 30 trial
so you were one of the officers on the
scene where i got thrown over the dude's
trunk
did he get cited as well
was he cited as well for causing that
accident
i'll take your silence as a no
and do you understand that uh what i
operate is a bicycle
not
requiring a license or insurance
well it's not for him or you to decide
is it that's why you're in court on
trial in this case it's for the judge to
decide if what you were operating was
just a bicycle or a motorized bicycle
with a petrol engine attached to it
now i haven't seen this bike but i like
to imagine that it looks a lot like this
and that goes for the person operating
it too
can you get your name and badge number
please
excuse me policy number 400-1 subsection
a
you must give your name rank and payroll
number upon request from any member of
the public or the department
unless you're in an undercover capacity
which you are
not
are you failing to follow your policy
not according to the policy you just
cited he isn't 400-1 subsection air
covers disrespect or discourtesy towards
colleagues and citizens
unless of course this policy is out of
debt but this is the latest version i
could find i mean yeah he probably is
obligated to give you his details but is
it a good idea to start a conversation
with a witness outside court
especially one that you're going to be
cross-examining shortly i would think
not
and this is what our text elders go for
in racine wisconsin
they even got some case law for the
court today
so maybe you'll learn something about uh
fundamental
human rights that you swore an oath to
uphold and defend
so we shall see how long it will take
the court to
start
see what kind of evidence these people
have to uh
say that
i
am required to
give them anything or have anything
to exercise a fundamental right
that has been upheld time and time again
good morning good afternoon
how are you um you need to wear a mask
i'm fully unable to wear one if i have
one on we have something actually that
you can actually use that's been
approved by the cdc
it's not been approved for my condition
how can you say that when you haven't
seen what it is yet but wait why do i
get the feeling that nothing he brings
out will be any good for your condition
oh so it's been approved for people that
black out when they have things too
close to their face
and swing on anyone within reach
and those end up too close to my face
i was smothered as a child what's too
close to your face
anything that gets too close to my face
i've tried those those are too close
so i will not force myself to black out
and swing on anyone especially in open
court
for anyone's benefit okay and that is my
human right
i will not commit a crime knowingly and
willing
and the cdc in the world yes but
this is for people who
experience blackouts and have problems
with math yes for some people that do
like i've stated already i've tried
those they don't work okay they don't
work for everybody there is no one size
fits all for everybody
okay
no problem right and i have no problem
more than social distancing i tell
everybody that
plus we have all these shields up
and to the surprise of absolutely no one
this guy is or was or still is an
anti-massacre i'll link his channel
below where you'll see plenty of videos
of him getting kicked out of public
buildings for refusing to wear a mask
during the pandemic
he also does first amendment audits and
cop watching so is it that trifecta of
dumb
hey we don't make the rules right
health department says yeah but you guys
do swear enough
the health department has advised and
decided and i'll actually be bringing up
some case rulings for
the court
that
even if i was in a automobile
which is quoted in these ruins
it is a fundamental right of a citizen
to operate in their personal capacity
their private conveyances
this people is what a person looks like
was absolutely no social awareness
whatsoever i just love how he randomly
starts spouting soft bs out of nowhere
as the officer is explaining the cdc
rules um soft sets are the gift that
keeps on giving
well oh i've already gotten i understand
those are all okay and all that we'll
get your case in due time this is your
uh table you're allowed to sit at it
uh use any kind of uh i'm just pushing
my pocket in i have nothing in my
pockets in my pants except for my keys
oh no i just saw you looking i wanted to
reassure you i have nothing on me so
here you go i am in no way
word of caution
i can sit on this side so bear with me
i'll take that
and uh
quick question before we start
is there any way i can get a copy of
like
the evidence that they have against me
because
by the time i was able to get to the
police department get the freedom of all
the information requests
i wouldn't have had time to get the
information before court
and i thought maybe since
it was here
i
started finding out exactly what i
needed to do
maybe a couple weeks ago so let me get
this straight you had enough time to go
online and do your quote-unquote
research on a sovereign citizen website
then download copies of misinterpreted
case law from that website which we will
see shortly but you didn't have enough
time to get hold of the police report
and citation
and i went down got the paper i went to
fill it out and then i looked at the
time frame
and i realized it was too short of a
time frame for me to for sure get the
information
so i figured if it was right here in
court i might be able to get a copy
at least of the police report
and the citations
even though technically those don't
matter at this point
you had a copy of the citation yes i did
forget those
yes and i did forget those
with my cat
they're in my actual other hoodie that
my cat usually rides in
but i knew you guys would probably say
something about me coming in with my cat
so i found somewhere to store it's not
what we would say it's what the health
department wants so
um
this is the kind of guy who as a kid
would blame his cat or his dog for
eating his own work when he lost or just
couldn't be bothered to do it
i just figured at least if i could get
the citations and police report
because i never even received the police
report on this
since everybody here has been tight and
professional just like the last time
i doubt you guys are going to do
anything i'm going to pause this
richard kern
um
[Music]
um we're here for two citations but
before we begin i'm actually going to
need to dismiss
one of these citations and that is for
operating a motor vehicle without
liability insurance um
i don't think maybe we need to go into
that today
i don't know that the question was ever
asked that seen whether there was
insurance um so i am moving to dismiss
because i don't believe the city can get
its burden um today for that citation so
if there's no objection
um no
[Music]
of the
yes sir
my name is
when the city has called its last
witness then the city will rest and you
may then offer evidence including anyone
this is which city and then crosses
then when you have rest of your case the
city could often revival testimony and
you will have the right to do the same
i will then give each party a chance to
summarize their view of the case before
they make my decision
if you have
i do have one question about that last
part
what if it is all case law that an
attorney should know already
that is literally used on a daily basis
by the courts the fact that the deer is
still going ahead with this prosecution
should be a giant red flag that the
cases you are referring to don't say
what you think they say
i mean if there was a case out there
that says you don't need a license to
operate a motor vehicle then the whole
world would know about it it wouldn't be
a giant secret and lawyers would be all
over it
certainly even after the trial
so i can't at least read out the
part of the case law that pertains to
this case and cite that case law
oh i'm not trying to read out a whole
lot it's just maybe two excerpts
with the case law
yes i fully understand that
i'm reasonable
i'm not trying to take up all
uh day
this is not a criminal case you should
understand that
the burden of proof is not beyond a
reasonable doubt
but clear satisfactory and convincing
evidence
further as much as there's no right
against self-incrimination in a civil
trial such as this
you may be called as a witness by the
sea
do you understand this yes
[Music]
nope
motion to dismiss
with no objection from the extended i
wrote this mistake
thank you
um
judge i have
for both mr kern and you
if this is a copy i just copied the
statute that is listed thank you
that's listed on the citation
as well as another statute
because i believe that
the citation should be amended which is
allowable by statute
um and this amendment would be in mr
kern's best interest
the wisconsin statute section 343.053 a
says no person may operate a motor
vehicle which is not a commercial motor
vehicle upon a highway in the state
whereas section subsection 3c
is more appropriate here it says no
person may operate a moped or motor
bicycle unless a person possesses a
valid operator's license or two forms
are listed here with a special
restricted operator's license so
if there's no objection from mr karen i
would move to amend the citation to 3c
and i would note two benefits to the
defendant here in that 3a i believe is
punishable
by
up to 200
for 200 and this one is only a
forfeiture of 100.
also a conviction under 3a
one conviction is civil but if he has a
second offense within three years it's
charged criminally whereas that i do not
believe that is the case under 3c
at least under the penalty section 34305
for that violation it does not save such
um so those two are benefits to mr kern
to proceed under 3c as opposed to three
days
you understand the difference um i do
kind of
um
the problem that i have with that is
one
i know one of the statutes that
they're citing
i've looked it up because it was given
to me when i was denied my pre-trial
and i looked it up
the one for the motor vehicle which is
not commercial motor vehicle
is valid
the other one when i looked it up it
said that that one was repealed
which my understanding means that's no
longer valid law
you add it here first people wisconsin
has repealed the law that says you don't
need a license to operate a moped or
motorized bicycle on a public road
what a story mark
as well as the fact that if you look at
the very bottom my bike falls under
these parameters
so my bike is a low speed motor assisted
bicycle which is federally regulated
as a bicycle
not a moped or a motor bicycle
well that all depends on how fast your
bike goes if it's less than 20 miles an
hour then yes but if it's over that then
state law recognizes it as a motorized
bicycle so it all depends on how fast
you were going i really hope you're not
dumb enough to testify under oath that
your bike can go over 30 miles an hour
on top of that
and this
will get the whole
case law out the way right away
every citizen has been ruled tons of
times over the decades
the right to travel on the roadway is
not a mere privilege that can be
regulated
it is a fundamental right under life
liberty and the pursuit of happiness
and cannot be regulated by the
government
unless it interferes with somebody
else's rights
and requiring somebody to have a
licensed registration insurance even
though they're operating safely
is
honestly against all of these case laws
which include miranda versus arizona
chicago
coach first chicago among many others
and that's all i'm
quoting on those
yeah so none of those cases are relevant
miranda v arizona is a u.s supreme court
case so well done for that unfortunately
it's a case about the fifth amendment
and chicago motor clutch company is an
illinois supreme court case so it
doesn't apply in wisconsin and it says
the exact opposite of what you claim it
actually says your right to use the
highway can be regulated
i wouldn't even bother citing your other
cases
you have the objection to the amendment
which appears to be in your favor
to
uh section 3c as opposed to 3a of 343.5
you can amend it
but
even by that
and her own definition here i don't fall
under it
so i have no problem with you amending
it
it's just even by her own paperwork
my life doesn't fall under it
based upon
at this time i'm going to call officer
phillip davis as the city's first
witness
good afternoon
please raise your right hand
and do you soundly swear the testimony
you are about to give in this proceeding
shall be the truth
officer would you please state your name
for the record
officer phil davis
number 9746
thank you and how are you employed i
work for the city of racine police
department
and how long have you been with the
racine police department over two and a
half years and throughout that two and a
half year tenure have you always been a
patrol officer
um and were you on duty as a control
officer on sunday august 15 2021 at
approximately 9 56 p.m
yes ma'am
and on that date at that time were you
dispatched on a call
yes ma'am and where were you
i believe right avenue
[Music]
and did you respond to that location yes
no is that location within the city of
racine state of wisconsin
and when you arrived at the scene can
you please briefly describe what you
observed
i saw other officers on the scene
a motorized bike and a man on the permit
getting loaded into an ambulance
okay
and you said that you saw a motorized
bike
what
what can you describe what the motorized
bike looked like
it was a pedal bike with a motor line
and when you see a motor how does that
motor
[Music]
[Music]
attached to it and that's what propels
the bicycle
and
did it have a seat for the operator to
sit on yes no
and
a pro do you if you had to venture a gas
approximately how fast
would that flight go
530 miles an hour okay
and have you ever seen other motorized
bicycles operating around the city
yes no okay um and
in your experience seeing those other
motorized vehicles
motorized bicycles i'm sorry
roughly are they going under 30 miles
per hour
yes ma'am oops so that testimony right
there contradicts this guy's statement
earlier where he said his motorized bike
only goes 20 miles an hour
wouldn't it be funny if when on the
stand this guy kind of corroborates this
officer's testimony
um
[Music]
and who was on the gurney
uh richard kearns
and did you identify mr fern
yes ma'am um i asked him who he was
okay and do you see mr kern in his
courtroom yes and would you please point
to him and describe one article of his
clothing uh the gentleman here with the
greatest green tree
thank you judge made a record reflect
that uh officer davis has pointed to the
defendant
thank you
and officer davis did you learn what
happened at the scene before your
arrival
um well my rebel just did that a
motorized fight for the
vehicle um but i got on scene mr kearns
explained to me what happened okay and
what
what did he use how did he explain it to
you what did he say happening he said he
was traveling eastbound on right avenue
uh he saw a vehicle pulling out the
vehicle
he then stood up and then
um
and while you were on movie on this
particular call were you equipped with
your body camera yes ma'am and was it
operating throughout your interactions
with mr fern
yes ma'am yeah did you preserve the
footage that was on that body cam for
that instance
and at any point before today did you
watch the footage from your body
and did that footage accurately reflect
the interactions you had with mr
did you issue any citations to mr kern
that stemmed from the august 15th
incident uh yeah
okay and what were the citations for uh
operating the vehicle without license
and operating vehicles
okay and um
you know we have moved to dismiss the
insurance citation so i'm only going to
ask you about the operator citation but
did mr kern have a valid driver's
license on august 15 2021
and how do you know that
i asked him if you had one
i'm going to give you a copy of this
this is what i'm going to hand to the
officer okay
officer hale's going to
show you up
to uh officer sorry i should have told
you that that's my fault
officer davis i'm going to show you this
document and i'm going to ask you if you
are able can you please tell me what it
is
yeah what does
um
so what
who is whose information is on that
document uh richard earl kern
and what is that doc or does that
document reflect or what does the
document reflect
uh documentary
[Music]
then he can deduce that he did not have
a valid driver's license on august 5th
thank you um judge i have written an
exhibit a on there if there's no
objection i would move exhibit a the doc
record of richardson
no
because i've never had a license i'll
openly admit it
okay
okay so get ready for the show to
begin
this is what i was referring to as a
pig's ear in the intro so depending on
who you are get your popcorn ready or
your face pan protection ready whichever
suits you
now
when she was questioning you about
what i had said on scene when you first
showed
up uh what did you say
you were you said that uh
[Music]
i had stated that they had paused and i
sped up
and then they pulled in front of me to
do the u-turn
and that's when i hit him
that's not accurate i had actually told
you clearly
that the gentleman had started the
u-turn and then hit the brakes blocking
my path
i know for a fact i did
officer judge i'm
sorry judge i'm going to object
it's not a question here but i would
just remind
the court that um we're here only on and
you know operating without a valid
license
what happens in the fact that there was
a crash nobody here is being tried for
what did or did not happen there
so that that crash is not
what we're litigating at this point
and in fact the point there is that
you may have a civil action against the
other driver
the issue i have with this is
i'm trying to establish his credibility
i see multiple omissions in his report
i also noticed omissions while he was
speaking with her
and i have the right to bring those up
point them out to bring up his
credibility
with regard to what you told him
[Music]
not to argue with him about what he said
okay
yeah so get used to the district
attorney objecting and the judge having
to walk him through the
cross-examination process
almost all the way because he simply
hasn't got a clue what he's doing
so did i not
tell you
that the gentleman
started the u-turn and stopped blocking
my path so i could not pass
after i stated that
when i told you he actually did pull out
in front of me after i started again
you stated to her
that they just pulled out in front of me
they didn't just pull out in front of me
did i tell you
that they pulled out in front of me
and then stopped
blocking my pet
[Music]
okay
the next
section is about the working light
that
in your report you said
uh no
operating with approved light could be
located on the bicycle
yet
there's no mention of the fact that i
had multiple
bicycle lights
that were a fix
or did you observe
the bicycle lights that were affixed to
the front of my basket that had smashed
into the car
[Music]
so
[Music]
is a
light that is sold
specifically for bicycles
[Music]
the relevance is also that there's
trying to assert that i wasn't able to
be seen
i mean yes it doesn't
directly affect the license issue
but one it goes to the credibility
and two it goes to the fact that
i believe
this whole thing
because i know for a fact racine county
has never cited a bicyclist
for this
no one on what i operate
well and i'm trying to speak directly to
the judge because you brought something
up
however
this is really more argument
than it is a question
um
you did ask him a question and he said
he didn't see right
but not
and it's common sense that any bicycle
light that is sold as a bicycle light
is wisconsin.approved
yes but he's saying he did not observe
any
whis dot approved lights
and he is now trying to say
that the bicycle lights that are with
dot approved that he never inspected
except for just to take a two second
glance at
he's trying to say that those are not
wisdot approved when he did not do
anything
to verify
he only took a two second glance
and them saying that there were no
witnesses
is a lie
okay then let me ask the question
did you guys actually question anyone
besides me and the one actually
operating a motor vehicle
okay
well
it seems to me like
this is just a railroad so
this guy is a dummy you are not being
railroaded you're just not asking the
correct questions which are related to
your charges you're on trial for driving
without a license or rather riding your
motorized bicycle without a license so
your questions have to be related to
that
basically
i don't know how to proceed because i
don't know how to address these issues
directly as questions
that i need
clarification on from him
[Music]
i'm trying to show that
i gave clear information to him he says
he document or he properly stored his
body cam footage
he didn't issue this citation until over
a month later meaning he could have gone
back and watched his body cam footage
it goes to his credibility
[Music]
when you guys are talking directly to me
or
okay
well then
what if anything did you do
besides
looking up
ncic
to
verify whether i was required to have a
license while operating what i'm
operating there you go now you're asking
the right questions i mean they are
stupid questions but they are related to
the charges
[Music]
if
it goes over these parameters
so you were misinformed
okay so
okay my question then my question then
based on
this and if
i don't know how to proceed with this to
have him take a look
but
based on this information that i was
handed by her
it says
that what you were given was partial
information
can i have him
take a look at this
i drafted
what i hope and it's is the law that is
relevant for today and the elements so
that is nothing that the officer had
beforehand and i gave it yes but
he spoke to somebody who supposedly had
this information
and was misinforming him
so i just want to get clarification that
at the time yes
he did take action because he was
misinformed
because i do need it on the record
so that when i do go to look for it i
can go and find out who
is giving out that misinformation at
least to have it corrected
and that's why i'm asking
if he was misinformed after he looks at
this
because then that right there would
also say that the whole thing should be
taken out because
hat did you do any
judge i'm gonna object here
so i was about to ask a question you cut
me off to
say i'm speculating
i literally i understood that i was
messing up by saying it the way i was i
was changing it to a question and i got
cut off
[Music]
so i'm trying to give you some leeway
but
she can't tell you whether or not
misinformed unless someone else had told
him that he was miserable
[Music]
paperwork provided by a court officer
that would show him that he was
misinformed so that he could now make an
informed decision on whether he was
misinformed or not
i was i heard earlier i can submit
evidence
this was given to me by a court officer
if this can't be trusted then how can
anything she says be trusted
and that's why i'm asking how can i have
this submitted so you can look at it
and say okay either i was or i was not
misinformed before issuing this
if it's not
so
if i'm trying to get to the point of
if the citation should have been issued
to begin with
are you guys going to object and say
it's irrelevant
because i have been trying to do that i
admit it's not in the same way you guys
are used to or you like
i'm sorry i'm not an attorney i don't
know the ins and outs yet of dealing
with this because i'm just starting off
this is my first time dealing with a
civil citation in court yeah you can say
that again
yeah and it shows buddy you should leave
it to the professionals next time you
know people who have actually studied
for years to be in the position they're
in
like say the deer sitting across from
you
so i'm trying to do my best
[Music]
now based solely off of the last section
that states the requirements that a
bicycle has to exceed
to become
requiring of a license mr karen i'm
sorry if there's an objection
that's why i'm speaking up because if i
let you finish and you make the record
and i don't object then i've waived it
so i'm not trying to interrupt you i
just have to object when i hear it
okay we don't have any foundation for
this this is a document that i drafted
and i gave to the court and the
defendant so this officer doesn't even
know what i drafted this is an excerpt
of the state statute and he wasn't even
explaining that
this is
i would like to hear a proper foundation
to be offering a document to the officer
in the first place and i'm struggling to
see
where this is going to
one establish whether
this should have been issued in the
first place
two
to establish if any officer
did any kind of investigation to
determine
whether my bike
actually exceeds those requirements that
she
brought to court to cite
because if i don't exceed the
requirements that she's citing and
bringing into court
as her
whatever she's entering it as
she's the one bringing it up
she's the one bringing making it
relevant
to this case so me bringing it up and
asking about it and asking to be able to
question it
is relevant i'm gonna ask this question
that
wasn't my only concern over that though
my
other concerns
[Music]
so i can't ask what he
what kind of investigation was done to
determine whether my low-speed
motor-assisted bicycle that is federally
regulated as a bicycle
what investigation was done to determine
whether it needed a license or not
was there any other investigations
there yeah
because that right there proves my case
you have to prove it requires it
do you have any other questions
at this time now
well if the officer testified that you
were going over 30 miles per hour and
then you admit under off that your bike
is capable of going over 30 and does
sometimes
then i think that right there puts you
in uh the need in a licensed territory
and under the regulation of state law
but i'm getting a bit ahead of myself
here so let's get back to the video
and i do apologize if it seems like i'm
trying to be difficult but i'm not
well and i mean i was trying to
get it into a question form and get my
point across but i wasn't being allowed
all right
officer davis
just in case there's any rebuttal okay
sorry thank you we'll correct your sheep
um
[Music]
okay
[Music]
do you want to
call an adversary
essentially
like i've stated i've
looked up the law on what i operate
i made sure that
i've been doing the research for about
eight to ten years now
what i operate is
49 cc's or under
it goes no faster than 20 miles an hour
with
a rider of 170 or 70 pounds
on level ground under just the power of
the motor
it can exceed that if you're pedaling
now
on the scene
i had told this officer and any that
were around
that
i was going between 15 to 20 miles an
hour when the accident occurred
i told him that
about half a block away i saw the guy go
to pull out but he stopped
no lights came on no nothing he sat
there the whole half a block
so i started pedaling again
getting back up to 15-20 miles an hour
i had two lights on the front
two
solar lights on the back
plus a turn signal
laser light on the back
that are and the front lights were
actual bicycle lights bought at a store
that were smashed by the accident
when i got
less than a car length
behind where this gentleman was parked
he
gunned it into a u-turn
and then halfway through that u-turn
decided to slam on the brakes blocking
the bicycle pack
which all of this was told on scene to
the officers
i was thrown from my bike
i now have
permanent nerve damage from what it
seems in my leg
but no doctors
see me to actually determine it right
now
and
from what i understand i'm the only one
that received a citation
for something that i'm not even required
to have
that's
both federally regulated as a bicycle
that doesn't require license
and the fact that numerous case law
from both local and federal supreme
courts
have ruled
that
especially on what i'm operating
i am not required to have license or any
of that
[Music]
so
and i mean
like i said even
the information that
she brought in i forgot your name ma'am
robinson
uh even her information now the body
weight
is a little low i'll give you that but
it's still close
i'm still around 150.
but
even her information
my bike falls below that parameter
well below considering i never go over
20 miles an hour
unless i'm pedaling
or going downhill
are you actively trying to sabotage your
own case or are you just this dumb
you've just admitted under off that your
quote-unquote bicycle does go over 20
miles per hour therefore invalidating
your whole argument that your bicycle
again in quartz is regulated by federal
law
that's the only time i ever make it over
20
and i make sure that because i have a
phone mounted
with a speedometer app on it that runs
on or offline
so i have a speedometer 24 7 whether i
got internet or not
i do everything i can to be safe on the
roadway
and
i mean literally in the past
eight to ten years i've been trying to
get an operating motor motorized bicycle
i admit i have been hit numerous times
mostly when the bike wasn't running
when it was
before it actually got running
this last time
it was running
i literally
had
nothing to do with this
only reason i can see why i'm receiving
this citation
for a citation i should never receive
for what i'm operating
which what i'm operating is right
outside if you want to take a look after
court
it's a two-stroke motor
literally if it was a four-stroke i
could understand and you can tell
a two-stroke from four-stroke
four stroke i can understand those
definitely go about 40 to 50.
what i operate i don't take it over 20.
and when i bought it i made sure
i didn't need a license or any of that
from the guy that actually motorized it
not one minute ago you admitted that
your bike does make it over 20 miles per
hour
that's the only time i ever make it over
20.
only
reason i can think i receive these
citations over a month after
the incident
here we go with the i'm being persecuted
and targeted by the police line because
i've got a youtube channel i'm an
auditor and cop watcher or whatever you
are and to be honest they probably
couldn't give a crap about your youtube
activities nobody else seems to
it's because i have a youtube channel
where i do post both good and bad
encounters with
law enforcement
and government officials
and i admit
every encounter during this case has and
will be posted
simply because i do like to encounter
the good individuals
and show them doing the right thing
but we also need to expose the bads so
that we can replace them or re-educate
them
so that we can improve the system
and you think you're the man for the job
dear you know the man who cannot keep
his story straight about how fast his
bicycle goes
and when
i'm facing this
when there's no legal justification for
it
they did no proper investigation to even
determine
if my bike was above these parameters or
any parameter that needs a motor
except for asking
one person
that's not an investigation
now
all i'd ask
well also on top of all that
the fact that when i went for my
pre-trial that you sent me for
it's on youtube already that the city
attorney flat out
denied me my pre-trial
which i know
is not legal
what really happened she didn't deny it
the hearing was supposed to happen over
the phone due to corvid but you turned
up in person without an appointment to
the city attorney's office you then
refused to wear a mask like you did
today and the police were called and
then you were asked to leave the
building
i'll link that video below
all i'm asking from the court is to
get rid of this citation
and like i said you can even come out
check my bike out if you want
i have no problem with it
it falls underneath these parameters
and does not require a license
period
and i mean even the case laws that i've
stated and all the others that uphold
the same ruling
those include and like i stated
automobiles
so even the first law that was cited
is unconstitutional
per
all the case law that i have on my other
phone
including the two that i cited to you
to the court
because of the fact that in
non-commercial
capacity
you are it is a fundamental right under
life liberty and the pursuit of
happiness
to travel on the roadways and that's
been upheld
every time it has gone to the supreme
court
i said this in my last video and i'll
say it again now it's irrelevant whether
you are driving for commerce you're
interpreting the words employed in
incorrectly black's law dictionary
actually doesn't say anything about
driving being commercial when it says a
person employed in it simply means
engaged in the activity of as in how do
you employ your time the idea that
employed means remunerated for is
utterly wrong and just shows a lack of
basic education
i'm not trying to push for that to be
thrown out i understand that
a bigger process
i'm just hoping that the court will
actually uphold justice
and remove this citation for the
operating a bicycle
without a license
which everyone i talked to about laughs
at that
even looking at the bike they laugh
about it so
that's all i have to say
[Music]
[Music]
i would like to also clarify
that the other thing that makes it a low
speed motor assisted bicycle is the fact
that one it has two operating pedals
the fact that you cannot
start from a stopped position
and just straight hit the gas and go
you have to pedal it
in order to get up to a certain speed
before kicking the motor over
otherwise it'll turn the motor off
and
lock up the back tire
so you can't just hit the gas and go
from a stop sign or any of that you have
to pedal it to even start the bike
and that is another thing that
classifies it as a low speed motor
assisted bicycle
[Music]
i would have had some but i wasn't able
to get all of them for court today
and that's actually witnesses to the
fact that the officers only talked to me
and the person in the car that caused
the accident no one
else but since i couldn't get them to
come today
all i can do is assert the fact that
i've been informed that by numerous
people
that were that actually live on that
block
[Music]
can i step down
if the law you've been charged with was
repealed then i would think it would be
prudent to have this in writing so you
can show it to the judge
let's just say i looked this up and
couldn't find anywhere in text that says
the law that regulates licenses for
mopeds and motorized bicycles has been
repealed
let me know what you think in the
comments
anyway on to the closing statements and
then the judge's ruling so let's get
back to the video
no rebuttal
[Music]
thank you judge um i just want to say
that two citations were issued here
uh later but i would say that that's all
within the two years statutory
limitations um we proceeded with only
one today um there wasn't any testimony
other than from mr curry in regards to
the actual accident that occurred
because
it really is irrelevant in regards to
the citation that was issued
the way i see it after breaking down
this particular statute
this defendant within the city of gracie
operated a motorized bicycle without a
valid license
the wisconsin statute section 343.453c
states that no person may operate a
motor bicycle unless that person
possesses a ballot operator's license or
one of two forms of a restricted
operator's license
i would note that those restricted
operators licensed by statute
are dot
approved so it's an application and it
is tracked by dot
so the
ncic for the got record that was
submitted shows that there was no valid
license whatsoever issued to mr karen
which would include any type of
restricted accolade
and that would also be true for august
15th of 2021.
so basically if the city has to show
clearly satisfactory satisfactorily and
convincingly that this defendant
did operate this particular fight uh
within the city so
mr kern identified himself he put
himself in the incident he admitted it
to the officer and even spelled his name
for him so i don't believe that there is
any identification issue here um mr
curran put himself at the scene we know
that that was at the intersection before
near the intersection of brighton
thurston so we know that is within the
city of gracie so i believe that there
is jurisdiction here
and we have checked the box for venue
um third he operated a motorized bicycle
mr kieran put himself on the bike in
this location and he told us exactly
when he sped up and when he stopped so
he has put himself on the bike which
checks the box for the operation
i know there's a disagreement as to
whether or not it's a motorized fight
but the state statute does help us out
here the statute has a definition
section and subsection 30 within 340.01
that serves for definition throughout
the traffic code and a motorized bicycle
is a bicycle switch a power unit that is
not an integral part of the vehicle has
been added
and we have a bicycle going to the
officer a pedal bicycle
where a gas and oil combination
is added to the motor to propel the
bicycle
there is no limitation within the
statute that you have to
not be able to pedal it first or that it
has to take off solely propelled by the
motor it just says that it has been
added to permit the vehicle to travel at
a speed of not more than 30 miles per
hour
so mr karen has given up his weight
which
includes 150 pound rider on a dry level
surface
but the key here is that it goes not
more than certain it doesn't say between
20 and 30 it doesn't say less than 20 it
says not more than 30. so based on the
officer's testimony and mr kieran's
narrative
he basically is stating under the
wisconsin statue that he did operate a
motor bicycle
so and the i believe i skipped it or i
mentioned the fourth element first when
i said without a valid license
the exhibit a which was entered into
evidence shows that there is no
valid license that has ever been issued
to the defendant
so based on the wisconsin statute that
defined a motorized bicycle and then
requires that the operator of such
bicycle have a valid license i believe
that all of those elements through the
officer as well as mr turner's testimony
will show the court that clearly
and satisfactorily and amazingly that he
did violate um
staff 23.305 through the scene
and i just wanted to note that
there's a descript
mr trump had a lot of emphasis on how
fast bike or left there ever that it
doesn't go very fast
um if it's under 30
then it is a motorized bicycle and if it
can get over 30 then it would be a
motorcycle based on the definition in
the statute and a motorcycle also
requires a license so no matter how fast
this bike
goes or doesn't go
um
that's a lot to unpack um
first things first as i stated earlier
in the case
i was informed of
both the 340
and the 343
343 is still on the books even though
it's unconstitutional
and 340 has been repealed
you cannot use
a repealed law to win to justify
a classification when it's been repealed
as a classification and the federal
classification
classifies what i'm operating as a
bicycle
nowhere in all the united states does a
regular bicycle which is what i'm
operating as deemed by federal
government
nowhere does it require a bicycle to
have a license or anything like that
yes it requires
that i have the turn signals that i have
lights to the front and back
it does require all of that
but it does not require a license or
insurance
i have to follow all traffic laws
as in
following the traffic signs
turn signals stuff like that
but it states clearly that because it's
regulated as a bicycle
does not require a license
that's federal
on top of that
she wants to quote the whole
no more than
this right here is
almost identical to the federal ruling
that says
the exact opposite of this and i believe
that is why
this law
was repealed
and that is why she was trying to keep
me from bringing it up to him
because she brought it in as just an
extra bit of information that she might
scare me with
into taking
whatever from this case
i'm sorry i'm not gonna back down on my
rights
and i'm not gonna back down when the
government
or government officials not you
necessarily
are coming after me for something they
shouldn't be
and
honestly as a judge
i'd hope that you would see this
and understand that
she even admitted this wasn't a law when
i was trying to bring it to the officer
meaning she knows that the
340 is repealed
i've looked up
numerous times over the years
bicycle laws for gas-powered bicycles in
wisconsin
every single time it comes up
there are no
book no laws on the book currently
because this one was repeal
it can't be used to convict me or to
charge me with anything
at all
and if i'm operating what's not
federally regulated as a vehicle moped
motorcycle
i'm not required to have a license
so
in closing i'd hope that you'd see the
facts for what they are
on top of the fact that citizens do have
the fundamental right
that's been upheld by the supreme court
to travel on the roadways
only
if they're not operating for commerce
commerce yes
license registration insurance is
required
because it's undue use on the roadway
not normal wear and tear
again you admitted under oath that your
quote unquote bicycle can and does
exceed 30 miles per hour therefore
making it a motorized bicycle so you
need a license to operate it end of
story and we've already been over why
you're wrong about the right to travel
in this video and numerous other court
cases where judges have consistently
ruled that the right to travel does not
create the constitutional right to drive
your cases are wrong and have been
misinterpreted by you and other
like-minded individuals
so i just want to make sure i understand
your arguments
and one is that wisconsin statute
section
34305 is unconstitutional
yes
well the way it's written
that's all my research points to that
yes
and i've tried looking it up different
times i just looked it up yesterday
um
all i can say is that i drafted this
yesterday copy and pasted the statues
from the wisconsin fashions online
so
but i i do i want to emphasize this is
my version of what i came in today to
prove
i know that the court only the court can
direct as to what the law is um this is
my excerpt to try to hone
on the trial basically
um but i the only thing i can say here
is that these are excerpts from the
and your honor
so i can clarify that
when i've done my research on my own
before i was given this statute
i never found this law the only way i
found this law
was because i was given the statute at
city hall
so if you know the statute you can look
it up easy
if you don't you're just looking for
general laws in wisconsin
it's not active
so yes she can definitely look it up and
say yeah i found this law
it's not admissible in court if it's not
on the books
because it was repealed for a reason
and so what i'm going to do is i'm going
to make my ruling at a later time in
writing
and after i've had an opportunity to do
my own research on it and
then of course i had to talk to you
with instructions should i be saved
[Music]
i would include written materials
explaining what your rights are in terms
of an appeal
both uh if you wanted a
new trial or if you wanted it that's
called the denomination or if you wanted
just a call on the record
and you'd actually if you guys do make
it that easy for me you'd be the first
court to make an appeal process easy
at least here in racine
and i'm hoping it doesn't come to that
thank you sir
you too
so
we're going to gather up our paperwork
here
that we have now collected
[Applause]
oh dang it
so according to the original video
description he was found guilty at a
later date of operating a motor vehicle
or motorized bicycle without a license
and i guess the law he said was repealed
wasn't
i couldn't find any evidence of that
either to be fair but he of course still
maintains the position that the law says
otherwise
but his own testimony sunk him as well
in my opinion
he claims the judge restricted his
defense and claims the dear and the
judge wouldn't let him finish speaking
but that's not what i got from that he
was inexperienced and didn't really know
what he was doing
i thought the d.a and judge were patient
with him and helped staring through that
cross-examination
anyway if you stuck around until the end
of this then thank you i really do
appreciate it i hope you enjoyed the
video if you did then please leave a
like share the video and subscribe to
the channel and if you really enjoyed it
then please consider supporting me over
on patreon or you can leave me a super
thanks
take care and i will catch you in the
next video
you