Fort Collins, CO – Sheriff Justin Smith (self-proclaimed “Constitutional” sheriff) says his job is to enforce court orders; tells witnesses that he will arrest people even if the court orders violate the law. (July 5 2011; Larimer County Sheriff’s Office)
8-Year-Old Boy Faces Possible 11 Year Sentence; Larimer County Trial Begins November 15, 2011
Woman in Larimer County prepares to defend her son’s life against actions by the state.
Subpoenas to appear and produce will be served this week on more than 50 witnesses, including Larimer County Sheriff Justin Smith, Larimer County District Attorney Larry Abrahamson, Larimer County Eighth Judicial District Chief Judge Stephen Schapanski, Attorney General John Suthers, and 4th Congressional District Congressman Cory Gardner.
The case against the woman and boy began as an administrative procedure classified as “domestic relations”. The woman filed Colorado State Judicial form JDF 405 (non-consent to magistrate) so that a judge would handle all aspects of the case. Magistrates and their supervisors have willfully ignored the non-consent to magistrate procedure and this has resulted in the violation of multiple laws by officers of the court and law enforcement officers. The woman and her son have not been accused of, charged with, nor arrested for any crimes or wrongdoing and they are innocent of any and all offenses.
ü Magistrate “A” called the woman’s citations of relevant and applicable Constitutional references and case laws a “gig”. (May 2011) At a subsequent hearing, he refused to allow the woman to speak. Then he told her: “you can say yes or you can say nothing”. (August 2011)
ü Magistrate “B” ruled on a change of venue request that had been presented against her. The magistrate held the change of venue request on her desk for at least one week prior to the hearing at issue for venue change. Magistrate “B” proceeded with the hearing despite woman’s request for a ruling on the change of venue. When the hearing was over, Magistrate “B” explained that the change of venue issue was no longer relevant because the hearing was over. (January 2011)
ü Magistrate “C’s” clerk of court claimed that form JDF 405 (non-consent to magistrate) was not presented, even though the form was in the stack of papers she held in her hand. (May 2011)
ü Magistrate “A” stated on the record that she had not reviewed nor considered the evidence in the case and then ruled against protecting the woman and boy. (January 2011)
ü Sheriff’s deputies surrounded the woman inside the court house. Sheriff’s office denied that it happened, then they said there was no record of it, and finally they admitted it happened but they had already erased the audio and video evidence. (August 2011)
ü Larry Abrahamson, Eighth Judicial District Attorney (Larimer County) tells woman and witnesses: “If you want a judge, you get a judge” and then refused to act on the law.
ü Magistrate “C” ruled on his own civil protection order that was filed against him. The magistrate further violated the law by ruling on the order after he had been non-consented. (May 2011)
The outcome in this case has the potential to affect many types of court cases in all 50 states. In addition to the jurisdiction and authority arguments based on Constitutional law, this case illustrates the critical distinction between magistrates and judges.
Call 1-855-OUR-RIGHTS toll-free for updates on the trial and for additional information. The message will be updated regularly.
The trial begins on November 15, 2011, at 9:00 AM in the Larimer County Justice Center; 201 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Colorado is an open court state and the people are invited to observe.
Stacy Lynne is the mom in this case. She and her boy are natural born people with full and reserved rights. This means they are protected by the United States Constitution as it is written. They give no consent to being ruled by unconstitutional, illegal, unlawful and administrative procedures. For more than three years, Stacy has been an independent investigative researcher, journalist and educator. She has exposed corruption in local governments throughout the state and across the nation. Motivated by truth and justice, her research and education has helped local business owners protect their companies from destruction by organized corruption in towns, cities and counties. She has creatively developed models for change using peaceful and logical solutions that encourage the return to individual rights, freedom and entrepreneurial prosperity.
DISCLAIMER: The elected officials, law enforcement officers, magistrates, and judges in this case are irritated with Stacy Lynne’s Constitutional foundation and citations of the law that are relevant and applicable to this and other similar cases. Knowing one’s rights and acting on those rights is inherently risky in these United States. Stacy Lynne is not an attorney and does not provide legal advice.