Quote:
Originally Posted by ggherkin
I think it is wonderful that you can spin all these arguments. However, the fact that you can make them does not mean they will be the deciding factor in front of a judge. One of the things that judges do every day is hear competing arguments, each of which is highly compelling, and each of which contradicts the other, and then judge which one should carry the day.
Until you have a body of case law that shows these arguments to be the ones that carry the day, all you have are words.
JMHO, Gherk
|
The truth is no one bring up the person. They admit to be the person or in person. They are committing fraud with the courts. By committing fraud, they get burned. If you address it with the court that you don't qualify as the person, then you are being honest.
My friend John William walk away from the default judgement because he insist he is not the person in statutes and not in person. You may find a couple court case on abortion that mention about it. You won't find much case law. People don't read that why they jump into the game. The person is like the ultimate user drug law. You won't find much.
With the hire requirement in the prostitution law, there are court cases on that. The judge brought out the Model Penal Code about the mistress-lovers exemption, social companionship exemption, and the noncommercial sex for money. There are solid court cases on that issue.