KC sergeant accused of DUI

From Glenn Rice: Platte County authorities have charged a Kansas City police sergeant with driving while intoxicated.

Sgt. Jay P. Pruetting, 46, remains on the job while the criminal case is pending. Capt. Rich Lockhart, a police spokesman, declined to comment.

According to court records, Pruetting was northbound on Interstate 29 near Northwest 64th Street on Feb. 7 when he was pulled over by a Platte County sheriff’s deputy who noticed Pruetting’s vehicle swerve.

Pruetting staggered after he got out of his vehicle, the deputy said. Pruetting failed a sobriety test and later refused to take a breath test, court records stated.

Comments

[eyesonucops]

If you refuse a breathalyzer you get a 1 year suspension of your license automatically. I'll be watching Monday for this cop to drive into work. citizens arrest will follow.

[FROG]

It's May for crying out loud! Had it been any of us it would have been in court in March. I believe I've had just about ENOUGH
of the double standard to last me a lifetime.

[Drew]

Well, if he was looking for an early retirement, he may just get it. Tsk tsk.

[Alan Mackinnon]

"Allegedly Refusing" a breath test is the most Patriot Thing we as "Private Citizens can do in holding our "Sovereignty".

It's an act of "Claiming your Legal Status" your 4th and 5th Amendment rights. Our Constitution was written for us for a reason, we are the "Suspected Guilty Private Citizens" considered by the Government and the State to be Guilty and suspect of all crimes all the time the moment we wake up and walk out of the doors of our homes.

When you 'Refuse' to give evidence all the Government can do is "Claim you Refused" to cooperate in offering them 'Evidence" and charge you for "Claiming your Legal status' like take away your rights, property, money, and Freedoms...

To EyesonCops, The moment a police officer is accused of a crime he also has the Ability to "claim his Legal Status" we as "American Patriots" wish this cop to be protected just as you and I are. So explain why you are Gonna file a 'Citizens arrest" on a cop who is also a "Private Citizen" once he/she has been accused of a crime?

Are you a NAZI?

[Alan Mackinnon]

and that's 'Patriotic" thank you!

[mutt]

Alan, I agree with you on your points, but I beleive failure to provide blood, breath or other bodily fluids when suspected of DUI is covered under Admin per se. You agree to that clause when you sign your drivers license. I'm not certain of that so please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. If an individual refuses to provide a test sample then I beleive their license can be suspended for up to one year pending a hearing if the driver requests one.

[Alan Mackinnon]

Mutt, you are correct.

The Admin Per Se law is a "Statute" or "Bylaw" created by the State or Federal Government to separate "Private Citizens" from their rights, property, money, and Freedom. I.e. the taking of your property "license" and arresting you "your freedom" then bail "your money"

It's simply there to "Black Mail" us or give the appearance that "we have to" give "Public Servants" evidence to convict yourself for an alleged crime, or else! Or else we'll be charged with a crime for "refusing" or in reality claiming "Legal status" and 4th and 5th Amendment Rights.

This is what our military service men died for, for all of us, our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and rights to privacy.

I'm against DUI, but lets arrest and charge private citizens, the cops, firemen, doctors and lawyers as well, that actually drive drunk and cause an accident, cause property damage, injury or death. Then we do breathalyzers, Blood, Urine because of a "Real" accident, property damage, injury or death. If you refuse it becomes a forced blood draw!

This imaginary make believe Alice in wonderland "I think you're DUI because you swerved or cross the line routine" by the cops has got to stop. Private Citizens are being stopped falsely accused, blowing a .02 and still arrested for DUI's. Those cases are dropped but the damage from the 'false arrest" is life long.

The DUI check points are "Anti American and Anti Patriotic" now we have Seat Belt Check points. Soon it will be "Baby Seat' Check points..... I smell cigarette check points soon!

The Per Se Law is actually an act of Fraud against Free Americans, and we allow it.

Read this:
color of law n. the appearance of an act being performed based upon legal right or enforcement of statute, when in reality no such right exists. An outstanding example is found in the civil rights acts which penalize law enforcement officers for violating civil rights by making arrests "under color of law" of peaceful protestors or to disrupt voter registration. It could apply to phony traffic arrests in order to raise revenue from fines or extort payoffs to forget the ticket.

[Drew]

Alan:

General Contact Information:
Larned State Hospital
1301 KS Hwy 264
LARNED, KS 67550-9365
(620) 285-2131

Drive safely.

[Alan Mackinnon]

Drew..

No Thy Self, be thy Master!

You must have a comedians card you carry around? Funny real funny, you're a funny guy. Someday you will gain the wisdom.

"It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect
his country from its government."
- Thomas Paine

http://www.duiblog.com/

[mutt]

Alan, again I agree with many of your points. You may come off a bit radical...OK a lot radical, but I understand how these issues can make a person fired up.

[Alan Mackinnon]

Yes, it's radical, not anymore radical than Madd, or these over Zealous prosecutors, or the Government.

We are all Guilty, the Constitution of the United States was written for Guilty people by our Founding Fathers who were extremely Radical.

The moment we invoke our rights is the moment we are considered "Guilty" for doing so, and then we are "Charged with an "imaginary crime" for doing so... the old; "He/She must be guilty because he/she just invoked their rights" is the common response we get.

Law enforcement is nothing more than our adversary, it's just like a game of Chess.

Now the Government is "Suspending" drivers licenses for not paying child support, what does child support have to do with driving?? Drivers licenses are being used as a way to get us to do what the Government tells us to do for their extreme radical behavior.

If you read the 14th Amendment you ill find this:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The "Per Se statute" violates our 14th Amendment.

Oh some will say I should check into a Hospital? Funny very funny, those are people we must really watch out for. The ones that want to have you committed to a hospital or thrown in jail.

Radical? absolutely, otherwise we end up being run by kings, Queens, and Dictators.

[Drew]

Alan, I Do have A comedian's Card, along with A Penchant for MisplaCed capitaLizations.

you, hOWEver, may Have my Check YourSelf inTo Larned free Card. You've earneD IT.

And yeS, I no thySelf.

Oh, and re: the fourteenth amendment thing. Nice argument, except that the due process Is in Place.

Could I have Some Tin Foil, toO? The rays are Strong Today.

[DMartin]

I am not much of a back alley lawyer, but I do know a fix when I see one. For no less than a decade I have seen one fix after another where police and public officials are alleged offenders. It is absolutely incredible to me that the public stands for it, but that is exactly why it continues. The impotent press in this town is no help as it collectively "soft soaps" and/or under reports almost every instance of this misconduct. I find it just amazing that we expect our citizens to maintain a higher standard of integrity and accountability. Is there anyone in the system with the guts to stand up and start fixing any of this crap?

[Alan Mackinnon]

Yeah I made some typing errors, sorry about that Drew. You left out the word "to" in your sentence there buddy.

The 14th Amendment is not my argument, it's written in black and white over 200 years ago.

There is absolutely "No Due Process" in the "Per Se Statute" held by the DMV

Drew, explain to us; exactly where the "Due Process" is?

I'm not a Lawyer, just a paralegal.

"It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect
his country from its government."
- Thomas Paine

[Alan Mackinnon]

Drew,

this is an excerpt taken from lawyers over at DUIBlog from an in house memo at the DMV.

If you regard this as "DUE PROCESS" then you respectfully know nothing about our Constitution, that members of my family died and fought for to "protect' our due process rights. Read on....

Regarding due process at the DMV.
1. The government agency that is trying to sustain the suspension — the DMV — is the same one conducting the hearing.

2. Hearsay police documents – which cannot be cross-examined – are admissible and commonly make up the Department’s entire case.

3. If the citizen wants to cross-examine the officer, he has to subpoena him at his own cost (service of the subpoena and the officer’s overtime salary) for the privilege.

4. The prosecutor is not a real prosecutor, nor even an attorney. Nor, in most cases, even a college graduate. He is an employee of the DMV.

5. The judge is also not a real judge — not even, as in other states, an ALJ (administrative law judge). In fact, this "judge" is also not an attorney. Nor a college graduate. This "judge" is, like the prosecutor, an employee of the DMV with a high school degree.

6. The "prosecutor" and the "judge" are, in fact, the same person. That’s right, this supposedly impartial hearing officer is both prosecutor and judge. He can object to the citizen’s evidence — and then rule on his own objection. He presents his case — and then decides if he wins or loses.

So Drew, if this is your idea of "DUE PROCESS" have a good time or you can go here:

General Contact Information:
Larned State Hospital
1301 KS Hwy 264
LARNED, KS 67550-9365
(620) 285-2131

[Alan Mackinnon]

You can read the entire memo here.

Secret Memo: DMV License Suspension Hearings Rigged

Posted by Lawrence Taylor on October 28th, 2008
Imagine the Presiding Judge of a courthouse telling the other judges, "There have been too many acquittals lately. I’ve reviewed them and disagree with most of your ’not guilty’ verdicts. All future acquittals will be submitted to me for review, and if I disagree with them you will be counselled and your fitness to continue serving as a judge will be reviewed."….

When a citizen is booked on suspicion of drunk driving, his driver’s license is immediately suspended by the police if he (1) takes a breath test indicating .08% blood-alcohol or higher, (2) takes a blood test (even though results are unknown until later lab analysis), or (3) he refuses to be tested. In essence, the cop is the judge, jury and executioner.

But what happened to due process, to fundamental fairness? Well, the citizen has a right to appeal the suspension by demanding an administrative hearing where he can challenge the DMV’s evidence, present his own evidence and argue his case.

In California, as in most states, this is done at a hearing conducted by the Department of Motor Vehicles. As I’ve pointed out in previous posts, however, this "hearing" is anything but a fair and impartial one. See Due Process and Automatic License Suspensions.

1. The government agency that is trying to sustain the suspension — the DMV — is the same one conducting the hearing.

2. Hearsay police documents – which cannot be cross-examined – are admissible and commonly make up the Department’s entire case.

3. If the citizen wants to cross-examine the officer, he has to subpoena him at his own cost (service of the subpoena and the officer’s overtime salary) for the privilege.

4. The prosecutor is not a real prosecutor, nor even an attorney. Nor, in most cases, even a college graduate. He is an employee of the DMV.

5. The judge is also not a real judge — not even, as in other states, an ALJ (administrative law judge). In fact, this "judge" is also not an attorney. Nor a college graduate. This "judge" is, like the prosecutor, an employee of the DMV with a high school degree.

6. The "prosecutor" and the "judge" are, in fact, the same person. That’s right, this supposedly impartial hearing officer is both prosecutor and judge. He can object to the citizen’s evidence — and then rule on his own objection. He presents his case — and then decides if he wins or loses.

Amazingly, however, a few of these DMV hearing officers try to do the right thing. So what happens if some hearing officer starts developing a conscience and makes a few decisions in favor of the citizen?

The following is an internal memorandum provided to me by a very reliable source which the manager of the California DMV’s San Diego hearing office circulated to his hearing officers yesterday. (Note: a "set aside" is the term used when a license suspension has been reversed by the hearing officer.)

From: [Manager, San Diego Driver Safety Office]

To: [names of 14 hearing officers]

Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 2:12pm

Subject: Set Asides

This is a reminder to place your set asides in the SET ASIDE basket in the file room. I run a weekly report to confirm that the set asides are being placed in the basket. Some of you have not been putting the set asides in the bin.

To date, I have reviewed 17 set asides. The results are as follows:

– 6 good decisions
– 4 are questionable — needing review of the [tape] recording to make determination
– 7 are unwarranted set asides

These results are terrible, in that we have no rookie hearing officers. Should you be responsible for any of the 7 unwarranted set asides, your manager will be discussing the case(s) with you, if they haven’t already.

I will be publishing my findings on each of your cases — good and bad ones — minus the hearing officer name and case info. Should you wish to discuss any of these cases with me, feel free to do so.

In reading this "smoking gun" memo, ask yourself the following questions:

1. Why are are the decisions — verdicts — of these administrative judges subject to further review by the DMV’s office manager? To identify and weed out hearing officers who are not sustaining enough DMV suspensions?

2. Why is the office manager substituting his own judgment for that of the hearing officer who heard the evidence?

3. Why are the hearing officers ordered to submit their set aside decisions for review — but not their decisions sustaining the suspension?

4. Why do supposedly independent judges have "managers"?

5. How can 11 of 17 decisions in favor of the citizen – a tiny percentage of all cases handled by the San Diego office — be determined "questionable" or "unwarranted"?

6. Why are the results "terrible, in that we have no rookie hearing officers"? Because "rookies" don’t yet have the big picture and are actually decidng cases on their merits?

7. What do you think the clear message of this memo is to all hearing officers who want to keep their high-paying jobs?

This is the supposedly "fair" hearing by an "independent" hearing officer that is given to citizens who have had their licenses taken by police. And as any DUI attorney will tell you, this same approach is found in hearing offices statewide.

Welcome to "due process" at the DMV.

[Drew]

Implied Consent. Notice. Driving "Privilege" subject to conditions of license. Your own right to counsel at an administrative hearing. Should I stop now or do you need more? You're welcome.

[Chuck Rizzo]

Anyone who throws a wall of text at someone saying they are stats but not providing the actual study always makes me think of Anchorman...." LOOOUUUUUDDDD NOOOOOIIIIIISSSSEEESSS!!!!"

[Alan Mackinnon]

Drew, you're excellent at missing the point.

Chuck, go here to find the "study" learn all you'll ever need in seeking "Wisdom"

www.duiblog.com

"It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect
his country from its government."
- Thomas Paine

[Alan Mackinnon]

Here's the "Per Se" definition from websters dictionary. What a lot of the American patriots I work with who regard the sentence; "not requiring any supporting facts or idea's" is very troubling and "anti American"

It's no wonder that simply being accused of a DUI is interpreted by the DMV as "fantasy land make believe" by this anti American government agency.

Per Se Definition:

Intrinsically, by itself, not requiring any supporting facts or ideas, standing alone. Latin for, by itself or in itself. Opposite of per accidents.

Here's the Implied Consent definition, this is the closest any of will ever to get "Alice in Wonderland Fantasy Make Believe" it's based on 'legal fiction" and solely benefits the government, corporations, and law enforcement.

Implied Consent n.

consent when surrounding circumstances exist which would lead a reasonable person to believe that this consent had been given, although no direct, express or explicit words of agreement had been uttered.

Examples: a) a "contract" based on the fact that one person has been doing a particular thing and the other person expects him/her to continue; b) the defense in "date rape" cases in which there is a claim of assumed consent due to absence of protest or a belief that "no" really meant "yes," "maybe" or "later." (See: implied)

[Christian Louboutin Pumps]

ballonnen ziet van Mickey's Magical Party? Als je daarop klikt, krijg je