Oregon has a new Law that SUCKS
Oregon: Revised Statute Chapter 153
This unconscionable act makes prosecution of your case possible by the police officer. Forget the arguments in the Tipmra that deal with an officer acting as prosecutor. In Oregon he can.
You can read this pathetic chapter at http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/153.html if you have the stomach. If you are a Oregon resident the legislature has certainly taken away your rights under the US constitution and prostituted itself shamelessly for the sake of raping its citizenry.
You can’t fight that chapter: Here is what I recommend.
Present the case law at the beginning of trial.
Let the officer testify
Now you ask these questions: Read them if you have to.
(if he answers yes to any question ask “When and Where”)
- Officer (name) how many years of Law school do you have?
- Officer (name) how many university level classes have you attended in the application of statutes and rules of law?
- Officer (name) how many university level classes have you attended concerning the literal meaning of the statutes or rules at issue?
- Officer (name) how many university level classes have you attended concerning the admissibility of evidence?
- Officer (name) how many university level classes have you attended concerning proper procedures to be used in the trial?
- Officer (name) are knowledgeable with Rule 153.083 of the revised Oregon Statutes including the meaning of the notation of “not added to or made a part to” in the Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes concerning ORS chapter 153”?
He will most likely answer NO or NONE to most of the questions. You now motion to the court. (Read this to the court)
“Your Honor under rule 153.083 a peace officer who issued the citation for the offense may present evidence, examine and cross-examine witnesses and make arguments relating to the offence. The operative word is MAY. By this officers own sworn testimony he (she) has no formal education as to application of statutes and rules of law, literal meaning of the statutes or rules at issue, the admissibility of evidence and proper procedures to be used in the trial. Permitting this officer to proceed under rule 153.083 is equivalent to allowing a person who has once upon a time seen a doctor to practice medicine.
"By the rule of “exclusion by inclusion” the legislature made specific that the word “Shall” is excluded from this legislation when it specifically inserted the word “May” into rule 153.083. In light of the officers own testimony to lack of training and formal education into the substance of the foregoing I motion for exclusion of the officer’s testimony and further participation of the officer as acting in the stead of a prosecutor.”
If the motion is granted: “Your Honor, Defendant motions for dismissal on the grounds of improperly admitted testimony pursuant to your previous ruling.”
You have made a point. The Judge may not buy your argument however it will make it much easier for you when you examine the officer on the calibration of the tuning forks, laser or other device used as outlined in the tipmra.
To be honest, because of Oregon’s new revised Statutes you are at a serious disadvantage and your chance is reduced to no more then 50/50 even with the tipmra. Nonetheless your fighting of the ticket and making much to do about the unconscionable rule 153.083 will in time cause a case to go to the State Supreme court for adjudication. The more defendants that contest this rule as outlined here will in time force a change and return of defendant’s rights.
If I lived in Oregon I would fight like a tiger in court. I would not take this insult to my rights lightly and even if I lose I would not go down without a fight.
Please send me your results when you use the defense as outlined as this will help others in the future.
In Today's World a Radar
Jammer Radar Detector is essential to prevent tickets