“It’s Only a Few Bad Apples…”

As you all should be aware of by now if you listen to the radio show at all, I have been working on a felony “Evading Arrest or Detention” case for the last several weeks. And if you have been listening for the last few years, then you are also aware that many of the facts and arguments I make on certain subjects have never been litigated or argued in the State of Texas Courts in a manner that addresses all of the in pari materia statutes on the particular subject. Which means that there is little to no “case law” relating to the specific argument.

The document that is posted here is a Motion to Quash Indictment that has been filed in the 63rd Judicial District Court in Terrell County Texas. I am posting it here with the full knowledge and consent of the individual that is being accused in the matter. I am also providing PDF documents for the four pleadings that I wrote for this case in links at the bottom. That way you won’t have to copy the web page and then try to massage it back into a formatted Word document if you find anything in it you might be able to use.

The Motion to Quash is quite long, but it had to be in order to cover all of the unconstitutional and illegal acts being perpetrated by the federal and local public officials in the matter so as to railroad this man into a prison sentence just to finally get rid of him. And if you can read this document and not get pissed off, then you are what is inherently wrong with America today, because it exposes the outright in-your-face corruption of the judicial process and system that runs all the way to the very top criminal court in Texas, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. And there is no one to blame for this sort of corruption but the self-serving attorneys themselves.

I am also going to link in copies of several of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals own case opinions that proves that the Court has been and is actively engaging in and sanctioning statewide criminal violations of Texas law by every lower court and prosecutor in the entire state. And that the sanctioning of these violations is done with the specific intent of denying every individual accused of a crime in their right to substantive and procedural due process. In other words, I believe that I have proven the entire judicial department of the State of Texas to be engaging in organized criminal activity that goes above and beyond even that which we have known or suspected, and they were kind enough to provide the evidence against themselves in their own opinions.

This leaves us having to ask, just when is this bullshit going to be enough to make we the People stand up, charge, convict, and hang every damned attorney and judge in the entire country from the nearest horizontal object strong to hold them aloft until all of their kicking and squirming ceases? Think about the following statements really really hard; is there anything, and I mean anything, that has gone wrong with the course and history of this country, any incident, any disaster, any war, any terrorist governmental attack, unconstitutional law, or violation of individual rights, during its entire existence, that was not conceived, implemented, or justified by some attorney or attorney wanna’be?

Think about that. The founding fathers despised attorneys, even though many of them were attorneys. It was a bunch of Pharisee lawyers that had Jesus condemned to death. Then we had ‘Honest’ Abe Lincoln orchestrating the civil war. The prohibition era and the ‘legal’ alcohol poisoning murders of over 10,000 Americans was overseen by President Woodrow Wilson when the federal government laced all alcohol products with a poisonous recipe of chemicals that included “4 parts methanol (wood alcohol), 2.25 parts pyridine bases, 0.5 parts benzene to 100 parts ethyl alcohol” and, as TIME magazine noted, “Three ordinary drinks of this may cause blindness.” (In case you didn’t guess, the alternative phrasing “drinking that stuff will make you go blind” also isn’t just a figure of speech.). Harry S. Truman oversaw the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and he went to law school to be an attorney, but never completed the degree after he won reelection as presiding county judge, even though he was informed by the state bar that he was already qualified to join the bar due to his prior court experience. Lyndon B. Johnson, the leading contender in the conspiracy to kill then President John F. Kennedy, went to law school, but never finished either — presumably because he could not have possibly passed the [pretend] ethics portion of the education. And that theme continues on through today with the Clintons and Obamas. This ‘profession’ is literally stealing everything from us, one step and piece at a time, and it must be stopped. But only we can do it. And we cannot do it by keeping our heads in the sand in the hope that the attorneys will simply pass us by because we choose to ignore their presence.

Remember, everything that Hitler did to the people of Europe and to our fighting men was ‘legal’ by the terms of the German-attorney made and enacted laws. And attorneys are doing the same things here, they have just set up a way to remove the middleman.

Like I said, the document is long, but it is an attempt to cover every possible exit and loophole that the corrupt individuals within the courts and judicial system might seek to squeeze their rat-like personages through so as to deprive an innocent man of not only his liberty, but also the few remaining months of his life with his family and friends.

So READ this, and don’t just think or wonder about it, DO something. SAY something. SCREAM something, at someone, anyone, everyone, that we are sick and tired of this kind of thing being done not only to us, but in our own name, by a bunch of corrupt self-serving communist-state loving sycophants!!

It is time to choose. Do you want FREEDOM, or freedumb?

12 thoughts on ““It’s Only a Few Bad Apples…”

  1. I have been told I am a good writer. It is probably not always the case, but I do try. I heard you and Randy Kelton years ago via Alex Jones. I was immediately transfixed with interest. Upon discovery of your shows, a year or so ago, I have been listening intently. I very much appreciate your cause which is why I want to offer some suggestions toward expedience, clarity with English usage. One of you two said something about the importance of brevity: Judges have a lot to read. Given, I do not speak legalese, I think I might have some insight toward edits which might make your writs more succinct, more effective. Due to the detailed nature of what you address, sentences are inherently long. When ever you can, shorten them; avoid complex sentence subjects, and run on sentences if at all possible.

    Never begin a sentence with “And.” Always skip the “And.”

    “And once it is determined, and notice has been given, that a grand jury is to be impaneled to hear a complaint against the Accused for the purpose of indictment, the Accused could then exercise his or her right to an opportunity to challenge the grand jury array. “

    Its a very slight difference: Once it is determined, and notice has been given, that a grand jury is to be impaneled to hear a complaint against the Accused for the purpose of indictment, the Accused could then exercise his or her right to an opportunity to challenge the grand jury array. (Each sentence must state one unique thing toward the conglomeration of points. The “and” must be innately understood. Its just one word, but the style point is important.

    “Had Baker been allowed access to the full protections and due process rights contained in the constitutions and laws, the full sets of facts and evidence relating to any allegations of criminal conduct by Baker would have been available to the grand jury. And, if such facts and evidence proved exculpatory or as an affirmative defense, then, it is almost certain that no indictment would have ever happened and no criminal prosecution commenced.”

    Had Baker been given protection of due process under law, the full set of facts and evidence relating to any allegations of criminal conduct by Baker would have been available to the grand jury. As such facts and evidence proved exculpatory, an affirmative defense, it is almost certain that no indictment would have ever happened and no criminal prosecution commenced.

    You know a shitton more than I do about lawyer-ing, etc. I just thought I’d offer a few observations in appreciation.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. maybe this is better: Had Baker been afforded due process under law, no indictment would have ever happened and no criminal prosecution commenced. Allegations of criminal conduct presented to the grand jury lacks evidence. – maybe it is too brief

    Liked by 1 person

    • I can always use improvement in writing, and suggestions help. Legalese does have its variances from regular language in many ways, and one of those is conjunctive references. They are very important to the way a particular law or statute reads and is effective when in operation. And’s and Or’s cannot be excluded from their reading or the meaning and intent of is lost. That is why I tend to make sure that any arguments on their points are made in that same vein. Thank you for the suggestions.


  3. I was so immersed in the content, I didn’t pay attention to the form. All in all, this humble penman,
    thought it was a noble and worthy, and hopefully, an effective work of excellent word crafting artistry.
    I’m just flabberghasted, and angry, as to why this ever growing departure from statutory written intent for protections, have been pushed aside by the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals. Why hasn’t someone taken it up the chain, and challenged this egregious habit that hurts thousands of Joe & Janey Public folks. The law should be the measure. Not a court opinion. How dare they “declare that an Examining Trial is only for Felonies. HogWash!!! If for some reason, they found themselves on the other side of the coin, I’m so sure these Prosecutors and Judges, would be demanding their right to an Examining Trial. But since they are “above the law” they skirt our protections, with clear intent to enhance their contribution to the revenue stream. Horrible irony. Again, Why has no one taken this errant court “opinion” to the Supreme, and challenged their unlawful and unconscionable actions that hurt our rights? Is it the “frog staying in the pot, because the water temperature, is ONLY increasing “a little bit” and surely, in the end, some judge with integrity and a conscience, will “surely step in to save us”…Uhhhhh..NOT!!!!!!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • They are NOT the “CEO’s” of anything. They are minor underlings with one duty, money extraction. A duty they must carry out while also making it appear that justice is being served in a fair and impartial manner and without displeasing their own overlords.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Some of your best work Mr. Craig, 14 years as a Deputy Sheriff and countless hours of studying law and innumerable court cases has really prepared you perfectly for helping people navigate the otherwise nightmare dealing with the lawyers, judges and the courts…


    • Well, I thank you very much. Just a slight info correction though, it was actually 14 years in the Air Force and a few weeks as a deputy sheriff working the county jail and studying for attending TCOLESE, but over 20 studying law itself during both periods.

      Again, thanks.


Leave a Reply to elquesnell Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s