The Lawball Game really isnt a game it is frustrating real life in the Courts. I do not know when the game was invented, nor by whom, i only know that in 1992 my mentor for teaching me all about the Court process told me "welcome to The Lawball Game, learning is baptism under fire".

I am not an attorney, and cannot give "advice" upon any situation, I will however try to explain the Lawball game to you in such a fashion that you can eventually make a win, and only the individual can make a determination as to what constitutes a win. Most of all what is blogged herein is my own tenets and beliefs, whether or not true and correct, they are my own, developed over the past 13 plus years, perhaps this year will be my lucky year, I do have one active case on file.

The rules of the Lawball game are simple, envision it a bit like chess, what? you never played chess? well you are in for a crash course then...... rule one, you are the only piece on the board on your side, the 64 squares and the other 31 pieces belong to the court, and the King is the judge or judges, each court comes with its own set of players, no one will help you and if they offer help you can believe that they are not helping, only trying to figure out what you are going to do next.

The players:

The In Propia Persona, Sui Juris...... that would be the person appearing in their own right and with full capacity to do so, not a mentally incompetent being RE-presented to the court by an attorney [court jester]

The Pawns..... these pieces on the chess board are mainly to protect the judge and the judge uses these pieces to invoke a fear into the litigant, they are the tentacles of the octopus in the ocean, we generally call them law enforcement, they answer to the judge and only to the judge and do his bidding at whim, whether it be issuing a ticket for traffic court or serving arrest warrants or delivering papers to appear in Court so the judge has someone to "play" with in the lawball game.

The Court Jesters..... These people we usually know as an attorney, they spout rhetoric and are a vocal mouthpiece for others, but in all they are Officers of the Court and have to answer to the judge no matter what it looks like in the Court room, If they make the judge upset they will answer for that not in open Court, but either in the next case they bring before the court or by paying the judge under the table to appease that judge, for which they become more belligerent against Folks not renting their services. The biggest Court jesters only know a few terms to spout against a non-attorney litigant, such as "That is frivolous", "this is becoming silly and the court should impose sanctions" or some other stupid statement that never makes sense. They do not tell their "clients" that the client is now a mentally incompetent which is the only way the attorney can speak for that individual in Court, otherwise they would be bound to act in an article 3 capacity in congruence with the bill of rights and act only as counsel for the accused or complainant.

The Court Harlots..... these helpful people, deputy court clerks, are the most treacherous of all, they are in the court clerk office only to provide a time stamp on the papers filed to each file of record, they are there not as a friend or advisor, and will purposely and intentionally not keep a non-attorney file up to date so the judge can back date and slip in paperwork if needed to cover their posterior position from getting into a sling. These people are usually part of a witches coven and are against anyone who is not part of a coven. To combat these people one needs learn about the way these people live their life, these are not the "good witches" sometimes called white witches these are the dark ones, the ones that are lorded over by a "magister" [a judge] and controlled only by that dark powerful force and answer only to the judge.

"Fingers"...... these folks are like a rook and bishop combined, they are there to record a court hearing in the upper levels of court, they work magic in a short hand version that ONLY they can read. And if you have need for a transcript they are not always going to provide what was actually said in court if the judge does not like it, and they triple space between lines as usually the transcript will cost one dollar per page, and it takes several pages to get a short hearing transcribed, let alone one that takes 30 minutes to an hour and i have had those lengthy ones happen all to often. generally there is only one fingers per court judge and they travel with that judge.... they usually in this jurisdiction record the hearing on tape, but no one but the judge and his fingers can have a copy of it as it does not exist and forget tryig to record a hearing for yourself, you will be allowed to visit the crossbar hotel free of charge for a contempt of court.... ergo learn early on "I apologize to the Court, I will try not to let it happen again" these words are akin to a get out of jail free card in monopoly.

The Judge..... the person in a black bat suit sitting behind a highly polished alter where the sheeple are taken to be "fleeced", shorn, or lead to slaughter.... take your pick. The Judge is the adversary that you are truely against, the judge makes the rules and chnges the rules at whim, and there is nothing a person can do be smile and know inside that having made the judge change something is a plus in the win column. If a person can make a judge angry, and not get thrown in the cross bar hotel for contempt, that too is a plus in the win column, an apology from a judge gets two pluses. The judge never seems like they pay attention to what is happening in the theater.

"The get of of jail card"...... in case of making a judge angry enough to threaten contempt, the magic words "I apologize to the Court" usually keep a In Propia Person Sui Juris from the clutches of the baliff...... but not always.

The rules of the game are simple, the lawball game is not set up to win it is set up for the Just-us club to prevail, whether they appear to lose or not, the individual appearing In Propia Pesona, Sui Juris can only hope to put the Judge into the positin of stepping down and retiring which then will result in a demand the other party settle the matter forthwith... meaning it is a win.... kinda, cause usually the attorney writes up the rules of settlement and it is never enough.

more later.

one of the Free Radicals on 5 pm timeslot on the left coast program BJ's Law Hour