MediaMatrix
Home
Channels
Videos
YouTube
Import New Channel
Update Existing Channel
Update All Channel Videos
Import Missing Videos
YouTube API Settings
API Docs
Quick Actions
Add Channel
Add Video
YouTube
Import New Channel
Update Channel Videos
Update All Channel Videos
Home
Edit Transcript - Worst Attempt at Self Representation By a Sovereign Citizen I've EVER Seen
Home
Videos
Worst Attempt at Self Representation By a Sovereign Citizen I've EVER Seen
Edit Transcript
Edit Transcript
Language
Format
Source
Auto-generated
Yes
Confidence
Content
and before I hear uh from the state Minister hey what I I take you on your word that you uh are not being recording or recordings proceedings but it isn't this concerning with the camera in your pocket and you can't and facing out that would be great just don't want the jurors to be worried about whether or not they're being recorded so no problem totally understandable okay guys today we're going to take a look at the trial which stems from my latest traffic stop video where this Sovereign citizen was arrested for refusing to identify if you remember the original video was both the traffic stop and trial combined but I've separated them both and done my best to put the trial in some kind of order because it was a mess and that also goes for his attempt at self-representation trust me this is one of the cringiest performances I've ever seen right let's get into the video thank you all right please have a seat and if you would please uh state your name is you're heading back to Kitsap County um and please continue what um how did you come into contact we were driving Northbound in the outside Lane of Highway 16 from basically The Gig Harbor area we are very close to entering back into Kitsap County and I noticed in behind me in the inside lane of travel a white Ford dually pickup truck overtaking me at a really high rate of speed and we were still in Pierce County at that time and we were still in Pierce County at that time and I increased my speed up to about 70 miles an hour and saw that the vehicle was still overtaking me from behind and at that point in time what I did was I activated my rear emergency lights in my vehicle which are red and blue lights um as kind of a warning to the person driving the pickup truck that they needed to slow down Joel that was driving the pickup truck and he gave me a thumbs up with his right thumb and continued by me oh are you little peasant you gave me a thumbs up and thought you could pass me on the freeway did you just refer to yourself as a peasant wow you really do have a victim complex there and by the way I do love the Mike Merrill crime tab in the left-hand corner there all it shows is that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about and as he was pulling away from me on the inside Lane that's when I activated my radar in the same direction moving mode with the front antenna and observed his vehicle speed to be 71 miles per hour and it was locked at the unit the defendant immediately asked me if there was an emergency and I explained to him that again the reasons for the traffic stop and he explained so the stop is based solely for money at that point in time um I told him no the stop was about safety and requested his driver's license registration and proof of insurance and so after you requested that information what happened um he basically told me that he wasn't going to answer any legal questions um without an attorney okay so that's all we have from the prosecution no doubt because the rest of the testimony makes him look bad and he's trying to manufacture a very specific narrative for this video so it's on to his quote unquote cross-examination of Sergeant Mike Merrill the sheriff who commenters on my last video said Bears a passing resemblance to Alex Jones and Hank Schrader and now I'm looking at them side by side I have to agree were you prepared to inflict violence in an act of discovery require you to rephrase that question were you prepared to um inflict property damage and an act of discovery I guess the state is just a little confused by the the question represents did you testify that you were prepared to break out the window of my property yes I did okay so were you prepared to break out the windows in an act of discovering information for the purposes of collecting money objection and sustained [Music] I like how he lists all the alleged crimes he is accused of committing and the financial penalties like it somehow makes his point for him the sausage never fail to entertain were you prepared to break out the window for information that would make it easier to charge bills sustained were you prepared to break out the window to discover information me oh man no he was in Africa but she testified you were going to break up I was prepared to break out the window in order to take you into custody after advising that you're under arrest yes okay just breaking out a window considered an act of violence Construction okay did you have a warrant no I did not can that be interested thought through process of law I don't understand your question is it a danger to make an arrest without understanding the law you know I guess the the state is objecting to the sign of questioning uh on that particular ground um we we discussed the well I think we discussed this partial abortion thing yeah sustain your cause of action objections um do you need a cause of action to make an arrest objection rephrase the question is a cause of action an essential component to authorize an arrest I guess I'm objecting I don't really understand great sustain from understanding questions did you have probable cause [Music] yes probable cause and could you please let us know what that was I'm not sure where he found this version of probable cause but I do know it's not from his State because this is the definition of probable cause from his state but I know why he doesn't like this one it's because it refutes everything he's just said like when a police officer can arrest a person without a warrant like for refusing to identify enough traffic stop typical sausage cherry picking I made a request of you when I stopped you for the two infractions to provide your driver's license registration certificate for your vehicle and your proof of Vehicle Insurance liability insurance and you fail to provide any of those items or identify yourself and that gives probable cause yes are you sure yes well according to Washington State lotteries but you don't go to or you intentionally stay away on purpose from sites in the Washington statute for probable cause because like I've already said it doesn't fit with your narrative it's the same with this nonsense on screen now I mean where did you find this because it looks completely made up and courts don't usually listen to made-up nonsense from the internet our police powers in general delegated to the police by consent of whether People based on the promise not to violate the constitution I'm not exactly sure how to answer that question you understand that you'll no longer have any police power if you value no either this criminal is completely stupid or he knows I wonder which one could it be with respect to the Constitution I'm not exactly sure how to answer that question you were operating under your oath you testified from the beginning is that correct that is correct yes and your office to the Constitution is accurate no I would objects John I don't see the relevance he's he's a general theory he's sworn to tell the truth I fell to see how this um would you look at that they really don't want to answer that question do they move on that's because your line of questioning has no relevance whatsoever he's a sergeant with the Kitsap County Sheriff's Department so yes he took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution he wouldn't be wearing that uniform if he hadn't this is making my brain hurt you understand that violating your oath of office contract immediately strips you over your voice yes well Mr uh Mike I would like to thank you for your confession we now have on the record that you knew that you didn't have any police power from the beginning and ignorance of the law is no excuse especially for an officer of the law really that's what you took from that answer what a way to invent an alternate reality for yourself and you've got a nerve saying he's ignorant of the law when I a random guy from the UK with no legal training whatsoever can debunk your nonsense with a 30-second Google search okay this is a traffic stopped all right correct the word traffic is defined as Congress and I would object overall we saw that at least I'm sorry to finish the questions according to your testimony your actions were based on traffic law which includes license plates and all those documents of the person that's legally required to provide and this is all based on traffic law is that correct yes and the traffic is defined as Commerce so I guess your honor that's where I would okay his traffic confines defines Commerce you're honored this the defendants requesting that this backed witness to find the law uh I just don't see how those objects I'm just asking that he defined his understanding of the law because this is the whole basis he's holding this up at a gunpoint he used to know what he's doing did he have his gun out though or are you just playing the victim again because being held at gunpoint is very specific and something you would remember and knowing you you would be crying even harder if he did pull his gun also and again for the definition of traffic you need to be looking at the revised statutes of Washington because they Define the word traffic as pedestrians ridden or herded animals Vehicles streetcars and other conveyances either single it or together while using any highways for the purposes of travel did anyone see the word commercial there answer the question as to what he leaves traffic to be I'll let you do that you can answer that question for me traffic would be the vehicles that are moving Upon Our roadways in the state hey do you understand your definition of traffic is a maintenance definition or not the legal definition of traffic no so you're uphold do you understand if you're upholding a legal definition of traffic while enforcing it based upon a Layman's understanding of traffic at gunpoint an obstruction the same next question you understand that the your understanding of traffic is incorrect based on a legal standard that you're enforcing at gunpoint your honor States just merely requesting that in pick up the gut point I don't see how that attempt to testify here do you realize that your understanding of traffic is incorrect based on the legal definition why you're upholding legal laws no I do not realize that okay you were enforcing Traffic Law Without understanding the traffic the definition of traffic in its legal context I did not believe so now that but you just admitted that you don't know the legal definition of traffic I'm no I'm not aware of the legal definition of traffic all right to be fair though neither do you so you're both in the same boat really the difference here is that this Sergeant doesn't need to know the legal definition of a word to enforce the law he just needs to know that a law exists and when people are breaking it even the Layman knows refusing to identify as a crime so stop with the theatrics so then any resistance to a legal traffic definition can forced by you would be out of line because you're operating on ignorance I don't believe that's the case are you just confessed to it be the case you don't know the legal definition of traffic is that correct you just testified at that yes I do not know the legal definition of traffic and you enforce in a traffic law based on a foundation of ignorance of the legality of the traffic definition I was enforcing the traffic law in the state of Washington which I have I have done for the last 30 plus years with never knowing the legal definition of traffic I guess that would be the case I love how he thinks this is some kind of gotcha question like it will have some bearing on the judge's decision somehow also because the sergeant doesn't understand the definition of a word that makes you right even though he doesn't have a clue himself this is some weapons of great ignorance on display here and I think we should all be thanking him for his contribution to Comedy and this legal traffic documentation is based on the non-legal traffic understanding is that correct objective questions sustain that's why you may stop because of safety and to obtain a traffic documentation that's based on the understanding of the Layman's understanding of traffic and not the actual legal definition of traffic which is what's used in courts and is the law I mean the traffic stop based on the speed violation and a license or registration violation based on your current understanding of traffic which is not the legal one right based on my understanding of the alliance in the state of Washington yes well specifically the media of traffic because the whole law of the laws that you're using revolve around the understanding of the work traffic in the state of Washington you're required to obey the speed limit scenario also required to have your vehicle registered and and have that plate displayed and that was what the basis of my traffic stop was and that's based on traffic along that correct of which you don't know the understanding or the meaning of traffic I do not know the exact definitions of those things no I did not I could not give them back to you verbatim okay so you were enforcing based on one principle which is ignorance but you were enforcing based on a legal definition but you were presenting it in a Layman's definition I do not believe that I was enforcing out of ignorance no that would not be accurate okay but you confessed that you don't know the legal definition I do not know I cannot sit here and tell you the legal definition though can you please identify the victim of this practice objection drugs yes the victim is me and everyone watching this video we sustain damage mentally and our Collective IQ has lowered from listening to you ramble on about things you know nothing about it's quite painful actually thank you an arrest there's an active force is that correct it can be yes I need somebody against their will to knock the force is that correct yes it can be and it's done without the authority of law that would be an act of kidnapping is that correct objections okay well if that forces you to help the authority of law it is a crime is that correct yes well it's a good job the sergeant had the law on his side then isn't it I mean we've all seen the arrest video you were stopped for speeding and refused to identify for what 40 minutes which again under revised statutes of Washington you can be arrested for eign so people change that to a little more understandable by enforcing laws containing words you do not know the meaning that makes you a dangerous Society is that correct objection sustained true or false if we remove you the crime goes away objection sustained true or false we keep you in the story The Crime stays complete with the victim it's an objection true or false you are an essential component for a crime that I'm accused of to exist objection the same if you were prepared to smash out the window because I didn't pay the plaintiff money is that correct rejection sustained you're prepared to lust out the window and violently destroy my property because you wanted to pay we wanted me to pay the plaintiff more money objections the same you want from the sign a question you know there's a really easy way to avoid all the fines attached to these charges and it's simple stop speeding stop driving without registration and start following the law like the rest of us and you won't need to make up this alternate reality then but I think you'd do all this because you enjoy the attention why else would you give the police a thumbs up while speeding past them and then there's this core performance which you seem to be enjoying a bit too much but that's just my opinion the basis of this crime is essentially I'm not doing anything which requires you to do everything is that correct I don't understand your question I'm sorry basically the crime says I willfully did something your State's objecting to a discussion about the law or at this point to discuss the facts so all over the world the objection Mr here if you want to ask if you're going to rephrase the question um as to the crime charge here today we're crying that our main challenge for today physically requires me to do what to to commit a crime when I made the traffic stop the person that I make the traffic stop of is required to provide me with their driver's license or form of ID identify themselves basically and then provide their vehicle registration certificate and their proof of liability insurance okay you just testified to a person did you have any evidence to support the belief that I was a person objection sustained be testified that I'm a man say this applies to all my objection sustained under Washington's day law and federal law you are defined as a person or individual and no amount of word salad will change that remember what happened when David Hall tried this in judge Hurley's courtroom yeah it didn't work then and it will not work now so basically you you confess that I do nothing and I'm accused of a crack by selling to provide the information to me as you are committing a crime okay so doing nothing is coming to the crack because that's basically just doing nothing in that case yes okay since all I have to do is nothing that requires you to do everything is that correct instruction is the same okay true or false I did nothing you did everything and I'm the one committing a criminal access that's correct rephrase your question or ask it again please okay true or false I did nothing you did everything and I am the one committing the criminal act is that correct I guess your honor of the state and thinking about this client I mean it's a compound question we have I think there are Parts there that have been affected and have been sustained parts that have been overwhelmed and now it's kind of just being thrown into one big question sustain you can read inspiration okay true or false for this crime to exist requires me to do nothing for you to do everything all right and this is short so true or false all I have to do to be accused of being a criminal taken all the way to the jury it's absolutely nothing is that true or false objection sustained foreign established that I've done nothing is that correct I wouldn't say that's correct I would say that you did not provide the required information that I asked you to okay so I did nothing is that correct well that is actually doing something you made a choice not to so again we're back to doing nothing is that correct your honor objections the same God this is painful when you're driving on a public road you have certain responsibilities like observing and following the rules and laws of the road one of those laws is staying within the speed limit other laws include handing over your license registration and insurance to a law enforcement officer when asked it's not complicated and plain word solid games to trip up this Sergeant will not change those laws or stop them being applied to you the um identification that uh Trooper Sherman showed you that's exhibit uh that's the one with the ID on it that's part of the record objection I guess I don't which idea was referring to I don't think so the problem with this idea is it proves I'm outside of their jurisdiction and they know that and they can't have this ID come onto the record or the whole case is gone well your honor this hasn't been admitted there's been no testimony about this identity was telling the truth he would have said he never got any idea at that point no this wasn't provided to me no what id did Sherman show you there was no idea that he showed me on that stuff well how did he have my information to give to you he visually identified you and he was able to go back in his information from his prior traffic stop with you and confirm who you are okay because I got it on video if I'm telling you here's objection you're on and now here is the video they would not allow in court they did not want anybody especially a jury to see excuse me excuse me what was that again it is Mike what are you doing you agree law enforcement should be held to the highest standard but you broke the law before you claim to uphold the law and you come into court and swear to tell the truth and then you lie oh I guess he showed them his American national ID and they rightfully dismissed it because it's fake and meaningless you can't provide a fake ID and then claim you've identified yourself that's not how that works for now so at this point in time your identification is based on hearsay [Music] well so is your definition of the word traffic in person so you've got no room to talk but one of the officers on that stop already knew who you were from a previous encounter so it's not really hearsay is it should I give you a anything saying that I'm this person or that you know you're under I guess States objecting is to be on the scope of um all over you can answer that question I'm sorry you never provided me with the verbally identified yourself or provided you know with any identification as to who you were so the the basis of your understanding of who you were working with projection yes it was based on Trooper Sherman's identification view from his prior contact with him it was first-hand information from Trooper Sherman which is hearsay team honor I I would object I mean there's a legal definition right sustained yeah with all the traffic stops you have under your belt I wouldn't be surprised if every police officer in Washington knew who you were so it's not here sir if they recognize you and then can verify your details on the police database so he didn't show you any form of idea that he previously took a picture of oh well you see now Mike Merrill knows that there is video evidence and proof that he was shown that ID and um his story changes now as you can watch and see ladies and gentlemen I hereby present to you kidnap County Sergeant Mike Merrill getting ready to lie in a court and not do a very good job at it and fly by the seat of his pants here we go [Music] I don't remember that there was no there was no actual government issue that identification that I was ever provided no government issued identification so there was some other kind of identification I don't remember exactly what he said that he had contacted you and I don't remember if it was what sort of paper he had or what he had printed out on his MCT um but there was never any ID that I was provided that I took a picture of okay but you just mentioned it wasn't a state ID so you know I guess you know that we've gone through several questions instead of objecting that's relevance sustained well I didn't see any story change there any lies or anyone flying by the seat of their pants he said he didn't remember seeing your fake ID that's not him lying that's him not recollecting seeing it but remember there were three offices on that stop as far as I know so how do we know it was Mike Merrill he was showing the fake ID detail in that heavily edited clip I'm just saying okay so the state has provided Discovery video objection question that was quick um the state has provided Discovery video that adds to procurement on it telling objection thank you Merrell here's the ID the honor he's just he's attempting to testify to something that's not currently sustained that I took a picture of well ladies and gentlemen if you are feeling a slight sensation of the urge to vomit You Are Not Alone what do these criminal foreign agents really think is going on well let's find out yeah let's not because I've had just about enough of this nonsense but also because he shows the face of one of the jurors and he has the nerve to talk about honesty and my urge to vomit comes from your creepy voice over which sounds oddly terrifying if I'm being honest okay so we never get to hear the verdict but I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and say he was found guilty because let's face it he was he's been driving illegally in speeding to get the attention of the police for years it's a really weird way for a grown man with kids to behave if he had been found not guilty then he would be shouting it from the rooftops and the video wouldn't be titled kangaroo court anyway if you got through to the end of this video then I applaud you you are definitely not lightweight thank you also to my channel members and patrons for your continued support it really does mean a lot right take care all and I will catch you in the next video
Cancel
Save Changes