District Court Judge Rules Against State Rep Marple’s Claim of No Jurisdiction; Trial Date Set

Judge M. Kristin Spath

Judge M. Kristin Spath of Concord District Court

After amazing video where New Hampshire state representative Dick Marple verbally spanked Concord district court judge M. Kristin Spath in her own courtroom twice, Spath has hit back with a two-page order justifying her claim that she has jurisdiction over the case.

Marple has been charged for driving without a license and has argued that the court has no jurisdiction over him as he is not “operating a motor vehicle”, which he says is a legal term that only applies to people traveling for commercial purposes. Despite Marple filing an exhaustive legal memorandum outlining the various cases on which he bases his position, the robed woman cited her own court cases:

The New Hampshire Supreme Court has also consistently ruled that the operation of an automobile- upon a public highway is not a right, but” … only a privilege which the state may grant or withhold at pleasure …. ” State V; Sterrin, 78 N.H. 220, 222 (1916), citing Comm.v. Kingsbury, 199 Mass. 542. The Court, in State v. Sterrin, at 222, also cited State v. Corron, 73 N.H. 434, 446 (1905), which references a liquor licensee, by stating: “The statute confers a privilege which the citizen is at liberty to accept by becoming a licensee, or not, as he pleases. Having accepted the privilege, he cannot object to any conditions which have been attached thereto by a grantor with power to entirely withhold the privileges.”

Translation: “There is no right to travel safely on the roads without asking your master government’s permission first. We are in charge here and you’ll do what we say, or else.”

Dick Marple

State Rep Dick Marple campaigns at the polls.

Spath then went on to have the trial date for Marple driving without the state permission slip set for April 18th at 12:45pm in Concord district court.

However, it doesn’t end there. Marple has since filed an 11-page “Affidavit of Truth – in Commerce – Second Demand” with the NH Secretary of State’s office and the court. In the affidavit, Marple challenges jurisdiction again, saying the court needs to show the signed “instrument” where he consents to their rule and further demands a jury trial. He says Spath’s stand on her alleged jurisdiction is an “abuse of discretion” and cites more court cases claiming that the state may not interfere in your personal business. He demands the case be dismissed with prejudice, saying that Spath’s claim that he voluntarily chose to acquire a license is false. Marple says he was under duress to contract for the license:

“The photo ID purchased bas imbedded under the plastic following this Affiant’s signaturethe letters “TDC”, signifying, “Threat, Duress, and Coercion” hence not a meeting of the minds and not a valid contract”

On page three of his affidavit, Marple contends that that if the target of the affidavit does not rebut the issues raised within 15 days that it:

will be understood as a confession and acceptance, as well as tacit acquiescence of all FACTS herein enumerated… “Government officers and agents are required to affirmatively prove whatever authority they claim. In the absence of proof, they may be held personally accountable for loss, injury and damages”. Ryder v United States, 115 S. Ct 2031,132 L.Ed.2d 136, 515 U.S. 177, “Failure to contest an assertion … is considered evidence of acquiescence”. US Supreme Court, Mitchell v. United States- No. 97-7541 (Dec. 9, 1998)

According to this document from the Secretary of state, judge Spath and the clerk of court Theresa A McCafferty, have not responded to rebutted any of Marple’s Affidavit of Commercial Default filed back in December.

Where will this go next? Presumably to trial. Stay tuned here to Free Keene for the latest.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


26 Comments

  1. cucaprimes

    Maybe some of you legal scholars out there can can help enlighten this layman on a particular point. How is it that we have a legal system ostensibly based on a Constitution and founded on God given rights and natural law, claim through apparent legal precedent, the authority to grant citizens “privileges”? I beg to sound rhetorical, but isn’t that why our forefathers fought the Revolutionary War-to free the subjects from the tyranny of a monarchy and what can be considered a more recent variant – the modern authoritarian state-claiming powers not granted it by said Constitutions? It’s my understanding that not all of the states ascribe to this doctrine of privilege granting power at least regarding non-commercial drivers’ licenses. That may have changed post 9-11. I do recognize U.S. citizens currently have no guarantee of due process under the NDAA and can be legally abducted or worse, but I wasn’t aware NH state government had gone rogue as well.
    Darn, and I was planning to relocate from my own commie state of MA to freer pastures to the north.

    Reply
    • John Redman

      Since this IS a New Hampshire case, he, like me, has the option of declaring himself an Art 10 rebel against the state. After that, the state can no longer claim that we give up some our rights to live in society as stated in the preamble. Being in rebellion does not require violent behavior. Passive resistance will suffice Creative nonviolence like the Christ entering Jerusalem on a donkey, mocking the high and mighty. Course, look what it got Him.

    • JL

      New Hampshire is better than Massachusetts on many issues. Why should one thing that is applied in every single state keep you paying high taxes and not being able to defend yourself? Come north!

    • Joe Brooks (@bjoebrooks)

      To all of you throwing around the God given rights whine, God didn’t give anyone any rights. He wrote the Bible not the Constitution. All rights ceded to citizens come from duly elected government.

    • absolute rights

      Unfortunately, here is the chain of authority…
      Once the people through the king off this continent, the power to make law fell upon the people.
      At that moment, the people could have installed any governance mechanism they wanted. They could have written governing documents that enshrined the principles of the declaration of independence.
      But they did not.
      Instead, just a handful of men created the state constitutions and, ultimately the current federal constitution. All of which call for total rule making authority for the governments.
      Then they picked up rhetoric and guns and proceeded to subject the balance of the population to their authority.

      And its been that way since day one. (Shay’s rebellion. Whisky rebellion.)

      However, if we were so inclined and able, those governing documents could be altered to achieve individual liberty we desire.

  2. Jimmy John

    First, you don’t need a drivers license to travel. Second, the court needs to prove they have Territorial jurisdiction. Third, the officer took an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and that makes him a federal officer, and he only has jurisdiction on Federal Property. There is one other thing. The Judge is her own corporation, and he is not a member of the judges Private corporation. No he can demand the case be dismissed with prejudice.

    Reply
  3. Joseph S Haas

    According to the dictionary: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/motor%20vehicle a motor vehicle is ANY ” automotive vehicle not operated on rails; especially : one with rubber tires for use on highways ” and the word automotive at: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/automotive = ” propelled by a self-contained motor, engine, or the like. ” of the key word I think is “self” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/self as in ” belonging to oneself : own ” of I think that Dick’s HB#____ gets into this title business of actually some monkey-business of really some “Protection Racket.” These old 1905 and 1916 N.H. cases are opinions of the N.H. Supremes. Thus for to a jury for the FINAL answer! That”s what I demanded by claim in 1983 when “they”/ The State wanted me in jail for up to a 12 months sentence possible on a 2nd offense (Class A misdemeanor) driving without a licence. * Dick is only at stage 1 violation level. He needs to win this or be cited a second time to THEN get to a jury. Or like what the Merrimack County Attorney did in my case of Michael Th. Johnson did dismiss by nol-pros the complaint #83-S-313 against me because they were afraid to set a precedent of to loose $millions of dollars in that I cited “The Oregon Law Review” of 1953, December at page 1 in that: a license is a restraint on the individual WHEN you are a proven threat to the public at large; and so NOT a threat until AFTER an accident. I didn’t and don’t use this TDC tactic, but similar of I did mark the application form for these ID cards they call licenses with that of cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cf. = to compare of see another source of information being cf. 83-S-=313 Merr.Co,.Sup.Ct. I used to put on there but then was told at the local sub-station of to go to Concord and tried there too, but REFUSED of they said I’d have to wait weeks and months for an appointment to argue this to the higher-up, of I just signed and let what I had previously written not expire but to refer to BOTH the past AND present, PLUS future too. – – Joe, P.S. Back then Homer St. Francis was the Native American Indian Chief of the Abenaki Tribe headquartered in Vermont, of him for them having claimed a good chunk of land in both Vermont and New Hampshire and in addition to their fish-ins every year also had those Abenaki License plates for sale too at a donation of ten ($10.00) dollars each, of I bought one but had to have two I guess by N.H. statute of for ID, and so yet to test that out with another $10.00 donation to become complete. Footnote: Judge Spath is on The Judicial Council https://www.nh.gov/judicialcouncil/ plus see https://www.nh.gov/judicialcouncil/aboutus/council.htm since there is a vacancy for a Lay Member appointed by the G&C. Maybe some reader here might like to apply to The Governor ** Executive Council https://www.nh.gov/council/ by the Wed., April 19th @ 10:00 a.m. deadline for to be nominated and confirmed at their Wed., May 3rd meeting? A letter of Interest should be sent to your Executive Councilor #__ of 5 and Joanne Ruel there at: https://www.nh.gov/council/contact-us/index.htm and the governor’s secretary: e-mail: meagan dot rose at nh dot gov is what Rhonda, the receptionist for Chris Sununu, the governor wrote for me this past week to give to YOU! “Uncle Sam” WANTS YOU! ? – no, but we do for to TRY to balance that of too many attorneys on this Judicial Council, to at least wake them up to the truth sometimes. I think it’s a volunteer job without any pay other than maybe some written commission with the governor’s autograph that like maybe 50 years from now you can sell for $big bucks on E-bay. I still have my 1970s Notary Public document signed by Mel; Thomson.

    Reply
  4. toolbag

    Marple belongs in a rubber room. Perhaps he’ll finally be placed in one.

    Reply
    • Drac Vermell

      It’s ironic how successful you’ve been in calling attention to the fact that you’re a tool in action as well as in name, now isn’t it my pet?

    • Joe Brooks

      Amazing to me that an elected official wants to be reelected to a government that he 1) doesn’t care for and 2) doesn’t understand. If he is not elected to evaluate and make decisions for his constituents then what does he see his function as? Our reps look at different situations and make decisions for us everyday. We are bound by their decisions because we elected them to do just that. Seems like he is just interested in a steady paycheck so he can spend his time tilting at windmills and imaginary dragons.

  5. Jimmy John

    Your tool bag must be empty.

    Reply
  6. johnrowe1

    The Drivers license issue is intangible property rights, taken by the DNC and Democratic party to control commerce under the DMV and AMV which are Associations or PMA’s. These cases have been won so go to The United States of America and see the cases under Human Rights tribunal versus Winter Park Fla and Colorado. The reignofheavens.com is a posting site which explains all these Socialist and communist controls used to usurp the other bad thing the Netherlanads constitution, and the Charter of Jusges from Roma Italy. Play their videos T-ROH Show also and you will be disclosed these criminal courts applied to you all. see http://reignoftheheavens.com/?page_id=2522

    Reply
  7. Weeda Claus

    A person who has others assign their status for them without their individual consent may be many things, but free is not among them.

    Reply
    • John Redman

      When might we see you round Grafton again? I plan on going to this court date.

  8. Jimmy John

    You would think he would file as sui juris.

    Reply
  9. Jumping Jacks

    The use of sovereign nation BS is ridiculous. Playing the semantics games never work. The guy is a little of center.

    Reply
    • Joe Brooks

      Lost ball in tall weeds

  10. Randall Flagg

    Iamman51.blogspot.com to understand the rights you think you have.

    Reply
  11. Ron Dacus Henry

    Citing the “judge”: The New Hampshire Supreme Court has also consistently ruled that the operation of an automobile- upon a public highway is not a right, but” … only a privilege which the state may grant or withhold at pleasure …. ” State V; Sterrin, 78 N.H. 220, 222 (1916), citing Comm.v. Kingsbury, 199 Mass. 542. The Court, in State v. Sterrin, at 222, also cited State v. Corron, 73 N.H. 434, 446 (1905), which references a liquor licensee, by stating: “The statute confers a privilege which the citizen is at liberty to accept by becoming a licensee, or not, as he pleases. Having accepted the privilege, he cannot object to any conditions which have been attached thereto by a grantor with power to entirely withhold the privileges.”
    This may be in contradiction to the supremacy clause because the federal government has defined the terms (see, 18 U.S. Code § 31) “The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.”
    A license would only be required to “operate” in a commercial capacity. The states have no authority to manipulate the terminology in furtherance of their schemes to convert a right to a privilege. Am I missing something here?

    Reply
    • Joe Brooks

      Ye you are missing something and I believe it is in your frontal lobe. You know…..the power to reason and think rationally.

  12. Mand Morrison (@mommybeez)

    You know, I try to make sense out of the gibberish/word salad these guys push but honestly it just sounds the schizophrenic patients I work with. To them the stuff they say makes perfect sense but in reality it is delusional. If just one of these guys would win a case or gain even a little credibility I’d love it. I consider myself as oppositional and freedom loving as the next guy/gal/person, but for now this just makes you seem like a nut.

    Reply
  13. Sara

    What is the latest on this case?

    Reply
  14. marshallb3596@gmail.com

    You need to have either a jury trial or take it to U.S supreme court with what the brand new Judge Gorsuch said in his swearing in he will fallow the constatution the way it’s write

    Reply
  15. JL

    He is going about this all wrong. Dont make claims. Just ask one simple question: Has the prosecution presented any evidence of jurisdiction that the constitution and laws apply here? Dont go making arguments because then you have to prove them. They cant prove jurisdiction, so it has to be tossed, but if you claim there is no jurisdiction, YOU need to prove that. Only ask questions!

    Reply
  16. bruce

    If he was suspended he was still contracted and under their jurisdiction. Right principles…wrong timing. Shill no doubt to make it look like you can’t win.

    Reply
  17. Figgjax

    This guy is confused – I am confused – he is charged with driving without a license – then it says Marple says he was under duress to get a license – so he’s a complainer, he grumbles but complies anyways, a teeter totterer! – you cannot have it both ways – stop consenting – cancel the license – stand naked on the fact you don’t consent then they have no jurisdiction – the court is correct, he consented to jurisdiction when he accepted the license albeit with a grumble! For example that consent is written in California Vehicle code sections 17459 and 17460. You consent to be the agent for the service of process when you accept a license and/or registration. PERIOD!

    Reply

Care to comment?