Judge ORDERS Competency Evaluation After WILD Court Claims By Sovereign Citizen

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-23

[00:00:00]I'm not threatening you. Say one more word and that's cont. 30 days.

[00:00:04]>> 30 days. Hey, what's going on guys?

[00:00:07]Welcome back to Sovereign Citizens Hall of Fame with your man TP. Today we are walking through the door of number 209 on our compilation list. We are going to be in two judges courtrooms for this compilation. And because of the length of this video and the proceedings, we will not be featuring more than two judges on this compilation. Now, before I give you their names, don't forget chapters will be added for your convenience. Commentary will be left in from these previously airing here on the channel. Don't forget to like, comment, share, and subscribe. It is much appreciated. And now, let me give you the rundown of the judges courtrooms that we will be in on today. First, we will be in the courtroom for the first time of Judge Andrew Poland out of the state of Colorado. And shout out to Sovereign Citizen Chronicles for sharing this particular proceeding with me. And last but not least for our two other proceedings of the same sovereign citizen, we will be in the courtroom of Judge Pauline Freen out of the state of Washington. I appreciate you guys always joining me here at Sovereign Citizens Hall of Fame. And it's about that time for 209.

[00:01:24]Court's going to call case number 23 CR884, people versus Michaela Mayberry.

[00:01:29]I'll take entries starting with the people.

[00:01:32]>> Becca for the people.

[00:01:39]>> And good morning, Miss Mayberry. If you can just state your name for the record.

[00:01:49]Oh, your honor, I respectfully appear a special limited appearance as the living woman, Michaela Mayberry.

[00:01:56]>> Okay.

[00:01:56]>> Uh, this matter was set for a jury trial back in February and Miss Mayberry failed to appear. Um, we need to get this reset for trial.

[00:02:10]And how many days were we setting this for?

[00:02:15]>> It was set for 5 days, your honor. The people do have a motion for non-estimonial um ID that is pending as well as a motion for added counts that would qualify for PH.

[00:02:28]>> Okay.

[00:02:34]>> Miss Mayberry, did you wish to make any record on the motion for non-estimonial identification and the motion to add counts?

[00:02:45]Ya, can I make a few records on a statement before we proceed?

[00:02:52]>> Go ahead.

[00:02:52]>> Any other actions?

[00:02:54]>> Go ahead.

[00:02:55]>> As mentioned, I respectfully appear by special limited appearance as the living woman, Michaela Mayberry, must first place a few matters on the record before any other actions proceed, as these are fun to fundamental to my understanding and peace of mind. and I speak to them in good faith and honor.

[00:03:18]>> Go ahead.

[00:03:19]>> I'm here today propria persona not prosay. I am not representing a legal fiction and I do not voluntarily submit to any roles presumed upon me under any administrative titles or statutes.

[00:03:34]I reserve all of my rights without prejudice under UCCC1-308 and demand that none be waved knowingly or unknowingly.

[00:03:44]as I do not consent to any contracts or jurisdictions not fully disclosed and agreed upon.

[00:03:51]Notice was already served including IRS forms 2848 and 56 formally revoking any presumed power of attorney and relationships that may have been assumed by this court or its officers.

[00:04:08]And in doing so, I did send notice via certified mail to the courts and its officers, including the DA and with the recipients acknowledgement with the green return signature slips that I received to my Texas abode.

[00:04:28]And in doing so, the DA, the court, and the officers chose acquiescence with no rebuttal to any of the notorized claims or notices that were sent. And to my surprise, there was like some unsettling financial documents that I discovered.

[00:04:49]And in law, acquiescence is considered, you know, acknowledgement. and they had the duty to respond and chose silence and didn't rebuttal.

[00:05:06]So the acknowledgements and agreement was agreed upon per the UCCC1-202 notice acknowledgement and mentioned in CFR like 11 CFR 1111.45 in administrative procedures.

[00:05:25]Right.

[00:05:25]>> And the financial documents that were discovered were obtained by my financial institution, Fidelity, which were verified by Bloomberg specialists.

[00:05:38]And the matter 23C884, to my surprise, developed a QIP number 316138106 with the fun symbol FEQ IIX.

[00:05:52]pretty much terrifyingly saying that this is proving that this court has a financial interest in the matter and it also proves that this is not government but a corporate entity. So, your honor, how can I ever be tried fairly and just if the court when the court and his officers hold a multi-million dollar financial interest in the matter and it's being traded through the Chris system and on the stock exchange as a security?

[00:06:33]>> Okay, Miss Mayberry, did you have any position on the motions that were filed?

[00:06:38]Yes, the these are my positions. In Leviticus 19:E1 15 states, should be no injustice in the court. So where is the justice? How is this justice?

[00:06:53]So I'm not I'm not consenting to junder with any corporate entity bearing my name and do not consent to be administered. I'm not here to disrupt. I'm not here to argue.

[00:07:07]I'm simply here to preserve the record, speak my truth in peace, and request that no adverse inferences be drawn from my silence. And I request that if this court intends to proceed that it produce on the record today a verified claim by a living injured party, the DA's license to practice law and not their bar membership number, a lawful contract bearing my signature, and a proper delegation of authority granting this court jurisdiction over me, the living woman. And if this court does not possess any of those items or all of those items today that I ask that this matter is closed and settled honorably as I do not consent to coorion, incarceration or any compelled contracts and again respectfully request that no adverse inferences be drawn from my silence or nonparticipation and assume procession.

[00:08:12]May God be with me as he who can judge me.

[00:08:17]1 Corinthians 4:4 and 5 state that it is God who judges me. Therefore, do not pronounce judgment before the time God comes, who will then shed light to the things now hidden in the darkness.

[00:08:33]And the true purposes of their hearts, and then each one will receive their commendation from God. All right.

[00:08:42]>> B.

[00:08:42]>> Thank you, Miss Mayberry. Uh, what the court's going to do, the court's reviewed the motion to add counts.

[00:08:47]Court's going to grant that motion. I know Miss Mayberry's record that she made today in regards to each of those motions. Miss Mayberry has previously been advised as to her right to court appointed counsel. Miss Mayberry has previously represented that um she intends on representing herself. Um, court's also going to grant the people's motion for non-estimonial identification. Based on the added counts, court's going to set this for preliminary hearing. How much time do you need, Miss Becker?

[00:09:19]>> Um, for the preliminary hearing, I would ask for 2 weeks to make sure that subpoenas are received.

[00:09:25]>> And how much time for the actual hearing? An hour.

[00:09:28]>> An hour.

[00:09:28]>> Okay. We're going to set for a preliminary hearing and then we're going to clear. Did you say four days for trial? Yes, your honor. Okay.

[00:09:47]>> June 2nd at one for motion uh for preliminary hearing.

[00:09:53]>> That works for people.

[00:09:57]>> Just trial.

[00:10:27]Let's go on top of sailors.

[00:10:32]Unless Miss Becker's on that.

[00:10:39]Are you on the sailor's case, Miss Becker?

[00:10:41]>> Yes, your honor.

[00:10:42]>> Okay.

[00:10:43]>> Um, if it would be possible to set in August or later, the people have since we are getting buckles within the next two weeks, we will expedite that testing as much as possible. Um, but that is going to add about a month or two.

[00:11:05]August 24th through the 27th.

[00:11:09]>> That works for people.

[00:11:15]>> All right. Anything else from the people?

[00:11:17]>> Not for the people.

[00:11:17]>> All right. We'll be in recess. Thank you, >> your honor. Um so sorry before we finish um so the people since Miss Mayberry is um prosay will have uh the detective in this case go to the jail with his bodywn camera and he will do those buckle swabs at the jail under video.

[00:11:36]>> Understood.

[00:11:36]>> Your honor, I'm not pro. I'm proria and I asked the court if they had any of those documentations >> today.

[00:11:47]>> I'm respectfully denying the request that they produce those documents today.

[00:11:51]I've you've made your record. Um, but I'm not going to grant that request.

[00:11:56]>> All right.

[00:11:56]>> So, is this court not dealing justly?

[00:12:01]>> I let everyone make their record, Miss Mayberry. We'll see you at the next court date. We'll be in recess.

[00:12:07]>> Guys, let me stop the compilation right here really quickly because this is my first time being in Judge Andrew Poland's courtroom. I just wanted to say something really quickly about this case. First and foremost, Judge Poland handle himself well with the young lady, Miss Mayberry, that was before him. And what I wanted to say about Miss Mayberry is this is maybe the first time that I've seen a sovereign citizen come disrespectful and prepared at the same time. Didn't see her reading any notes.

[00:12:36]She seemed pretty polished in what she was saying as far as what she believed as as far as the script goes. But the one thing that I did have a problem with and that I wanted to say something about was what she had to say about the Bible scripture and how, you know, she used it in in a way of saying like, "Listen, judge, you can't judge me before the time." And she pretty much took that scripture out of context. And I just wanted to touch on that really quickly as I do sometimes when these scriptures are brought up. But 1 Corinthians 4:4 and5 that she she quoted it says, "For I know nothing by myself, yet am I not hereby justified, but he that judgeth me is the Lord." Right? And we and we know those of us that believe in the Lord and in the scriptures that yes, the Lord will judge us. Verse five, which she also quoted, and I'm trying to do this fast, trying not to hold you guys. It says, "Therefore, judge nothing before the time." Right? That's what she said.

[00:13:31]until the Lord come who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will make manifest the counselss of the hearts and then shall every man have praise of God. So how she tried to use a scripture that wasn't what it was talking about, right? It's talking about that God is going to bring the light, the hidden things that are in the darkness, the things that we don't know about, right? The things that we can't judge because we don't have the facts on. But in her particular case or in anybody else's case, if you have the facts, you have the right to say something about that, right? You can judge that, right? It's not judgment as far as sending them to hell and say, "Oh, you're going to hell and you're no good." And so on and so forth. No, but you have a right to say something about that. If I have a friend who's married and I see him come out of a hotel room with another woman, I have facts. I see him come out of the hotel room with another woman and I'm able to say something to him if I want to about that. Right? So a lot of times we hear people say, "Oh, only God can judge me."

[00:14:29]That is not necessarily true. We also see in the scriptures, I believe in Corinthians where Paul, he there was a young man sleeping with his mother-in-law. And Paul, he he discussed it. He said, "What should be done in this young man?" And he says something very key. He says, "We that are believers in Christ," he says, "we judge those that are inside, but God judges those that are outside." So, if you have facts about something and and whether it's a case or something that's going on with a person or even with yourself, somebody has a right to say something about that. When you're judging is when you don't have the facts, right, and you don't know what you're talking about and you're assuming or when you're condemning somebody, basically telling them they're no longer fit for use and no longer fit to be used by God. That's a whole totally different thing. But I just wanted to say that because anytime scriptures are brought up in these cases and they're taken out of context, it definitely bothers me. But now it's about that time that we finish up this compilation and get into Judge Pauline Free's courtroom.

[00:15:32]>> We are on the record. Thank you for asking.

[00:15:35]>> Yes, ma'am. I would like to get on the record that I would like to fire my lawyer on.

[00:15:39]>> You don't you don't you don't have a lawyer. Remember you we've already been through this. You represent yourself, >> right? But I the one that's on standby, I would like him replaced with another lawyer.

[00:15:49]>> I'm not going to do that. What's the basis for that?

[00:15:52]>> Because irre irreconcilable differences.

[00:15:55]The fact that you had to explain to me what an affirmative defense is. When he explained it to me, it was to polar opposites. It's nothing that uh we can't we can't it's irreconcilable differences. It's like I would rather work with someone else.

[00:16:12]>> So if you do that sir, speedy trial starts over today.

[00:16:18]>> Disqualification of counsel is a triggering event for new commencement.

[00:16:22]>> Okay. So I can't replace him without restarting my speedy trial dates.

[00:16:29]>> Correct.

[00:16:31]>> Which will prolong my time in jail.

[00:16:33]>> I don't know that.

[00:16:35]>> Possibly.

[00:16:36]>> Possibly.

[00:16:38]>> All right. So due to that, it's gonna possibly prolong the time I have in jail. I do my best to work with this guy.

[00:16:46]>> Okay.

[00:16:47]>> Mr. Evans, do you want me to represent to the court what we had discussed? I mean, you didn't mention what you just mentioned, but the the subpoenas and what you're asking for.

[00:16:57]>> Uh you you Well, uh I I I'm going to write a letter to the uh to her. Uh mail it. I have it mailed out today. I'm going to write a letter to her as well as the Supreme Court of the state of Washington uh with the things that we discussed. But you can let her know the people that I want subpoenaed.

[00:17:17]>> Um sir, so any letter that you send to the court, you must include the city.

[00:17:22]You have to include the prosecutor or I can't look at it.

[00:17:26]>> Yes, ma'am.

[00:17:27]>> Okay.

[00:17:28]>> What you mean by must include the prosecutor?

[00:17:31]>> You have to send it to them as well. I'm going to send it to the clerk of court.

[00:17:35]So they they have they they should >> Nope. It's your burden to serve the city.

[00:17:41]>> What's the address for the city?

[00:17:43]>> It's the same building.

[00:17:45]>> It's the same building. So I have to send two different letters.

[00:17:48]>> Yes.

[00:17:49]>> I mean I have to make a copy of it and send >> I have no way of making a copy from inside the jail.

[00:17:56]>> You'll have to make one longhand then.

[00:18:00]>> Oh. Uh well, I don't even have the the paper I have is only enough to send one letter. They in the jail, they're not even giving me sufficient things to to even properly do what you're asking me.

[00:18:13]>> Um perhaps you could send it to Mr. Onady and then he can serve the city and the >> I I would ask that Mr. Ionady once it's filed, the letter that I'm going to mail out, once it's filed, he make a copy and send it to the prosecutor. I cannot look at it unless the city is included.

[00:18:30]>> I understand. But what I said is that once it's filed that Mr. Ionetti gets a copy and send it to the prosecutor and then you can look at it, which still should be before my next court date.

[00:18:42]>> So So that's this is the problem with representing yourself, sir, is that you do not understand the rules of criminal procedure and you can't you are having exparte contact if you send something only to the court and not the city. I'm not in what can you tell the jail give me sufficient paper so I can make two copies because they're not giving me the the what I need to do what you asking me.

[00:19:10]>> Um and that's why I'm suggesting that you send it to Mr. and then he can make copies for both the court and and the city.

[00:19:18]>> Okay. Mr. Ionetti, is there a way for you to come? Uh is there an address that >> I send this to? I don't have any information on you, Mr. Ianetti.

[00:19:28]>> I I believe it's on the paper the orders that you got should have had our address, but I we'll we'll get you our address today. Um and your honor, I guess what I I spoke with Mr. Evans and he asked me to um let the court know that he intends on subpoenaing subpoening Clarence Thomas. Um and then the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, the Honorable Judge Nanette uh Brown. Um he's also asking that we subpoena the Apostle Derry G. McCoy Senior. Um he believes that they're all witnesses for these case for this case or these cases that need to be brought in. Um I I did and I told him that I was able to and he said I could I just want to make sure Mr. Evans I can address the the I the case number that you said. Uh, >> I don't want to, like I said, >> that's a matter of secret state privilege. I don't want you discussing that.

[00:20:25]>> Okay.

[00:20:26]>> Um, so Mr. Evans, um, in order to subpoena people in another state, you need to actually go to the superior court of those states. I we don't neither Mr. nor I have subpoena power that goes beyond the borders of the state of Washington. Uh, >> would that be grounds to have this case removed to federal courts?

[00:20:45]>> I I don't believe so. There's not a matter. This is not an issue of federal law. It's not a civil case with um juris with amount in controversy over $75,000.

[00:20:57]Nor is it involving parties in other sides of the states. I mean, in separate states, there's no diversity jurisdiction. There's no subject matter jurisdiction.

[00:21:06]>> It's definitely uh the restitution is going to exceed $75,000 in the case that I'm found uh innocent by the jury. In addition to that, it would be biased uh by the city based on the witnesses will be able to by testimony that will uh possibly exonerate me.

[00:21:28]>> Is the city seeking any restitution?

[00:21:32]>> I I definitely stated that in the letter and I asked Mr. I I made that clearly known to Mr. Ionetti if he's doing >> sir. You can't get restitution. Um, >> I mean, I don't know what the basis is for restitution.

[00:21:47]>> If I'm found innocent, I would like restitution for my businesses for each day I sat in jail and they uh lost potential money.

[00:21:56]>> There is a there is a a rule that provides for that. That is not restitution in the in the sense that it would go to federal court. This is not a federal there's nothing in here.

[00:22:06]>> The amount that I'm asking for >> that has nothing to do with it. That's that's a separate issue. Um, is the city aware of any issue that would that would cause this case to be removed to federal court?

[00:22:18]>> No.

[00:22:19]>> And not even my rights as a tribal chief.

[00:22:22]>> Um, you have asserted that you are a tribal chief. I have seen no evidence of that being true. Just because you say it doesn't make it true.

[00:22:31]>> I gave you the proof, but you needed the physical case in front you which has a seal on it. So even if it's in front you, you still won't be able to see that I'm a tribal chief based on having a case in front you.

[00:22:43]>> It's my understanding that Mr. Ionati was able to obtain that document.

[00:22:48]>> Correct. Which is a matter of secret state privilege.

[00:22:52]>> So I you can't say it's in this document and then not let me see it.

[00:22:58]>> I'm just stating facts. The the that case is a matter of secret state privilege. So that would be grounds.

[00:23:05]Would that be grounds to get it transferred to federal court?

[00:23:09]>> The issue is whether you trespassed at the airport, sir. That's the only issue.

[00:23:14]>> I understand. But as a tribal chief, I have the right to have any uh grievances between me and the state heard before the United States Supreme Court due to me representing a sovereign state that's federally and internationally recognized. A sovereign tribe that's fedally and internationally recognized.

[00:23:34]You won't tell me the name of the tribe.

[00:23:35]You won't show me the document.

[00:23:37]>> It's a matter of secret state privilege.

[00:23:38]Your honor, >> you can't have it both ways.

[00:23:41]>> I'm just stating facts. It's a matter of secret state privilege.

[00:23:44]>> So, no, this, as I understand it, the city is not willing to transfer this case to federal court.

[00:23:49]>> Mr. Ionetti, I would like to appeal anything that's being declined. I just want to get this on the record that I want it appeal. Anything that's being declined, I want it appealed.

[00:24:00]>> Sir, you represent yourself. It's up to you to appeal.

[00:24:04]Okay, no problem. I I'll send a letter out today uh with a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court of the state of Washington. Um, appeals from courts of limited jurisdiction, which is what we are, go to superior court, not the Supreme Court.

[00:24:19]>> But I I'll try to uh speak to them based on the circumstances that I would like to oblige directly to the state supreme court due to the circumstances and the fact that it's connected to a matter of national and homeland security.

[00:24:35]>> You're going to have to show them proof that that's the issue, too. You can't just say it.

[00:24:40]>> I will show them the proof. I will show them the proof with no problem. It's on them if they want to do their work and research and diligence to get the answers that they want that they seek. I will show them.

[00:24:53]>> Once again, courts are not investigative bodies. They will do no research. They will not um um do an investigation. That is up to you.

[00:25:04]>> I understand. Exactly. and I'm doing an investigation on my behalf and I'm providing everything that they're asking me for.

[00:25:12]They just don't like my answers. I can't I'll deal with that on the federal level when I file a notice to remove once I uh get out of jail because I can't do Also, if Mr. Ionetti, if you can file a notice to remove with the federal courts or with this court, I would like that as well, please.

[00:25:31]>> U Mr. um do you have any concerns about Mr. Evan's ability to proceed.

[00:25:36]>> Uh I I do um I mean I don't have anything to verify any of the claims that he has made and the information and who he's asking for as far as witnesses in this case lead me to believe that there there may be issues.

[00:25:50]>> Um do you think it's appropriate to have him evaluated under 1077?

[00:25:55]>> I do.

[00:25:56]>> Does the city have any objection to the ordering of that evaluation?

[00:26:00]>> I have an objection.

[00:26:02]>> Okay. Can I object?

[00:26:04]>> You can object.

[00:26:05]>> Yes, ma'am. I assure you that I'm 100% competent and I assure you that uh everything I'm saying is true uh as far as civil case 24012 out of St. James Parish, Louisiana. That is a matter of secret state privilege.

[00:26:23]And it also verifies the facts that I'm making that you guys claim you cannot uh prove. But you won't let us see it.

[00:26:34]>> Mr. Ionetti has to get the case himself.

[00:26:37]>> He has it.

[00:26:39]>> So tell him give it to Tell him give it to you.

[00:26:43]>> Can I Can I identify the case, Mr. Evans?

[00:26:46]>> Civil case 2412 out of St. James Parish, Louisiana.

[00:26:51]>> Can I Can I identify the case and the information that I have?

[00:26:54]>> Like I said, you can give her civil case 2412 out of St. James Parish, Louisiana.

[00:27:00]If she wants to look over it, it has a seal on that case. So, you're going to have to get permission to get that seal removed.

[00:27:06]>> So, it's my true content.

[00:27:08]>> It's my understanding it does not have a seal.

[00:27:11]>> That's the information they have is it does not have a seal. It's a 1996 case.

[00:27:14]Blue Harvest Maritime versus Opal Evans.

[00:27:16]It was a suit for damages.

[00:27:19]>> That's that's the guys that it's under, but the true contents of that case is under seal. I assure you.

[00:27:26]>> And I guarantee it. I'm not the only person who can take it out of steel.

[00:27:31]>> I'm not guessing. I'm guaranteeing it because I I rece I became the chief of a federally and internationally recognized tribe when my father passed in 1993 and everything was made official with that case in 96. I guarantee it.

[00:27:48]>> So if it goes to me, it goes to the city as well. And are you okay with that?

[00:27:53]I would like to have it sealed due to the fact that it's going to expose innocent life in >> it's a matter of public ser it's a matter of public record and it's not filed under sealed I can't I can't I can't I don't know what the justification is for sealing it in this court >> that it it's going to affect innocent life including the names that he named that I don't want named with public uh to have public access to those names on that case and what not.

[00:28:25]It's It's definitely going to affect innocent life and it's connected to a matter of national and homeland security.

[00:28:31]>> Mr. What you were able to what what you have in your possession is a matter of public record. Is that right?

[00:28:39]>> The information I just have is what the court clerk told me. I can She indicated that I can pay a dollar a page for the file. They didn't they weren't able to tell me how many pages were in the file.

[00:28:48]Um they said it was archived based on the age. Um it is um I mean it is a state court um and it's they they indicated it was a suit for damages and they not consistent.

[00:29:06]>> It's connected to my estates that I have plural.

[00:29:12]Is it all making sense now?

[00:29:15]>> No.

[00:29:17]>> And there's only Mr. Evans indicated that there's something in the file that's only one person has the ability to unseal, >> which Roberts >> and that's not consistent with the way the law works. So I >> I'm the rarity I'm the rarity in this case. I assure you >> that's where my concern is. And I I mean the amount of money that could be or the amount of documents in the file, I I'd have to ask if the court wants me to try and make that request to get that I I can make that request. I would need funds from the court and I don't know how much. Um, but I a state case that that would be doing what Mr. Evans claims is not consistent with my understanding of the law. And the fact that a chief justice is the only one that could unseal something within that case is also not consistent with my understanding how the law works.

[00:30:12]>> Particularly if it's a state case, I don't see how Chief Justice Roberts would be involved at all. Not to mention, it sounds like this this predates him being chief justice >> because it's a matter of secret state privilege and it's also connected to the United Nations.

[00:30:27]>> Sir, you have two choices. Either to stop asserting this or get the document.

[00:30:32]Um, >> if I can get the documents, I would appreciate it.

[00:30:36]>> The fact that you just say a thing doesn't mean anything. You have to have the proof.

[00:30:42]>> The only way I can get the documents is for Mr. Ionetti to get it. Otherwise, I can't do it from in jail. If you could give me a PR bond, I would definitely get those documents for you myself.

[00:30:52]>> The problem, sir, is you just keep committing new crime or alleged to have just keep committing new crimes >> allegedly, but I assure you I'm innocent.

[00:31:00]>> Um, so were you able to obtain any documents, Missy?

[00:31:08]>> Not without I'd have to get funding from the court to to obain. And they said it was an archive. The person that I spoke to said it was in archive and they can they're they were in they were willing to go down and and get it and and make copies, but they said it's a dollar a page.

[00:31:24]>> Is it all or nothing? I mean that they you have to get the whole file or none of the file.

[00:31:27]>> I don't I because I I don't know the answer to that question. I can try and see if there was a judgment out of that case that I can just get the judgment, but I don't know specifically what I'm looking for because Mr. Evans told me that what I'm looking for is under seal that only Chief Justice Roberts can get me. And I don't think I need to contact Chief Justice Roberts and ask him to give me the document out of that case.

[00:31:47]>> If I'm lying about Chief Justice Roberts, trust me, these state charges, these petty charges are the least of my concern.

[00:31:55]>> I can I can write a letter to Chief Justice Roberts, but I I don't know what that will accomplish.

[00:32:03]>> Can they tell you if anything is sealed?

[00:32:05]>> That's I asked and they said they said there's nothing sealed in that case.

[00:32:09]>> Okay. Well, that says something right there.

[00:32:11]>> But Mr. Evans indicated, and is this okay that I say this, Mr. Evans, that what you want is only what Chief Justice Roberts can release.

[00:32:19]>> Correct. It's a matter of secret state privilege. So, it's not going to it's going to you're going to be able to see, but you're not going to be able to see, so to speak, because they they the Supreme Court of the United States of America has it set up that way purposely for these type of purposes.

[00:32:37]I'm not aware of them having these this this procedure, >> right? Because you if you're not familiar with the rights of a sovereign state and a sovereign tribe, you wouldn't know the ins and outs, but it's a matter of life and death that I know this and that I have the knowledge of what I'm talking about.

[00:32:59]>> Mr. Anand, I would authorize funds for um you to obtain the judgment. I'll give you up to um $100. Okay. Um, I am ordering a 1077 evaluation. I have concerns about Mr. Evans ability to proceed. So, this is on the court's initiative.

[00:33:14]Um, >> is this going to delay my trial?

[00:33:16]>> I'm leaving the trial date set where it is. Um, Miss Tenwer, um, I'm assuming that there's no immunity agreement between you and Mr. Evans.

[00:33:26]I would like to put one in place if possible an immunity agreement based on the right on the fact >> so this just with this will be with regard to your conversation with the evaluator it's not immunity from this case >> okay so I have to speak with the evaluator >> to get this done >> pardon pardon city would not object to that to get this done >> can I make an objection to that >> to what >> the order for the 1077 >> yes and you You have objected. I'm ordering it anyway.

[00:33:59]>> Can I appeal to the Supreme Court or to the appellet courts?

[00:34:06]>> I can't give you legal advice. I mean, I can give you >> Mr. Dionetti. I would like to appeal that decision uh that the judge made to the uh Supreme Court of the State of Washington directly due to it being a matter connected to national and homeland security. I'll I'll come and talk to you about how you filed file an appeal. Um your honor and and this is Yes. Okay. The court checked the right box for this. So the city's indicated that they don't have an objection to an immunity agreement. It doesn't sound like Mr. >> And I also would like to have a notice to remove this case due to bias and prejudice to the federal courts. Please.

[00:34:47]>> That's not a basis to remove a case to the Supreme Court. I mean to the federal court.

[00:34:54]>> Bias and prejudice is not a reason.

[00:34:57]>> No.

[00:35:00]>> And violation of my constitutional rights as well and civil rights.

[00:35:08]>> I think that would be a very valid reason. But I I'll I'll let you go with your decision. If you fail if you are >> It's up to you, sir. If you you can file to remove it. And you do you.

[00:35:21]>> Mr. Ionetti, can you please file a motion a notice to remove to the federal courts based on violation of constitutional and civil rights, please?

[00:35:30]>> I will come talk to you about how you can do that.

[00:35:32]>> Would you like Mr. Anadi there at the evaluation?

[00:35:36]>> No.

[00:35:38]>> Okay.

[00:35:38]>> Unless we're are we going to be talking about anything legal?

[00:35:42]>> I have no idea, sir. That's between you and the evaluator.

[00:35:45]>> Yeah. If we're talking about anything legal, I want him him there as standby counsel to explain any my legal rights uh far as my legal rights constitutionally and statewise. But, uh, if it's just questions regarding my competency, I can handle that on my own.

[00:36:05]But once it goes into um my rights and whatnot, I definitely need counsel available.

[00:36:12]>> U Mr. Sorry, Nadi, do based on your experience, do they discuss rights other than informing defendants of their rights?

[00:36:19]>> They the the my experience is that they tell them that uh that they're going to write a report and anything that they say to them is going to be included in the report. Um they ask them about their understanding of what the charges are and what their understanding of what the court's role in the case is. I don't believe they ask the person to give up any rights or do anything of that nature. Typically, >> if they're just asking me if I understand uh my rights and if I understand the charges, I completely understand that. I could tell you now being charged with trespassing and the definition of trespassing according to the state is to enter a building uh to enter a building without permission knowingly uh I mean unknowingly enter knowingly or >> that's okay. you I I I I believe that you you know that what the >> court wants to check the box that that he he wants us present then that's fine and they can notify us and we'll make we'll make an effort to be there for or schedule with them when it works out.

[00:37:27]>> No, I don't want I don't want them there. If it doesn't have it uh if the questions aren't pertaining to anything legally, I don't want them there. If it's just questions regarding my sanity, I can do that myself.

[00:37:40]>> Okay, >> that's my understanding. I mean, the only legal questions really they ask is your understanding of the judicial system.

[00:37:46]>> Well, yeah, I can do that myself.

[00:37:48]>> Okay. All right. Um, I'm setting a return date for that of June 14th. I'm not striking the trial date at this time. We'll leave it where it is. So, we will see you back here for the readiness hearing will be your next hearing, sir.

[00:38:02]>> Okay. And the subpoenas, you said you won't be able to honor the uh M.

[00:38:06]>> It's not a matter of honoring. I don't have the power. My my my power and Mr. power ends at the at the borders of the state of Washington.

[00:38:15]>> Okay. Would that be grounds for having this case removed uh to the federal courts being that I have witnesses that will be able to uh testify on my behalf that you guys don't have the power to subpoena.

[00:38:30]>> So, it's no um the fact that witnesses are out of state is is not grounds to transfer case to federal court. the parties. It's a matter of diversity of the parties. Um, that's my understanding of federal law.

[00:38:45]This is something you should discuss with a lawyer, though. I am not a federal I don't do federal practice, so I'm not um, you know, I haven't really thought about this since law school, to be honest, but um, you can have this conversation with Mr. >> Also, also I would like that Mr. Ayan to uh, file a motion to suppress any witness statements or testimony.

[00:39:06]>> You had to do that.

[00:39:09]Okay. But I'm putting it on record that I want the witness statement suppressed or any testimony that they're providing because they have incentive via the case that I provided you possibly to provide false testimony. So, a case that no one knows what's in it and that's going to bias your witnesses >> based on the fact that they could be under non-disclosure agreements, which is kind of like what's going on with that case.

[00:39:42]>> Okay, >> that case is a matter of secret state privilege. So, of course, you're not going to be able to just look at it and see exactly what's going on with it other than taking my word and contacting the Chief Justice Roberts who will send superseding orders as I stated in the letter.

[00:40:00]>> I suggest that you write to Chief Justice Roberts then for assistance because I don't know how >> once I go through the appellet process, I assure you I will and I I I can assure you he's paying attention to what's going on.

[00:40:12]>> Okay. All right. Well, we will see you back here then for readiness. Thank you, sir. Bail remains as previously said. Do we need a Do we need a commitment order, Madame Clerk, or can the Oh, you've got one in here. Or I put one in here, I guess. Okay.

[00:40:27]>> I don't mean to add to any difficulty, but the city wants to be sure that it is prepared uh and clear on its obligations. So, the court is leaving the jury trials previously set. So, we do have readiness on was that June 12th we had set up for?

[00:40:46]>> It does come. It does come two days before we we'll likely have the evaluation.

[00:40:51]>> Great. Um, so the city will go through its normal witness list and subpoena process. Uh just so the defendants's aware uh he had mentioned or named uh Lance Little, director of operation at C Techch International Report as potential defense witness uh at the last hearing.

[00:41:13]We're not going to subpoena.

[00:41:15]Again, if he's a defense witness, that would be the allegation of the defendant. Just to be clear on that, >> I would also like to subpoena the kids air.

[00:41:26]um uh CEO that uh of the airport that goes to the airport. Kitsap airportter charter bus is the name of the company.

[00:41:41]Kitsap airport. I would like to subpoena that guy as well.

[00:41:45]>> Yeah. And just to be clear, that's defendants responsibility and he would need to provide that information to the city as well.

[00:41:55]Mr. Ionetti, are you taking notes? I >> I will come to you. You represent yourself, Mr. Evans. So, I'll come to you and explain how you can get that done.

[00:42:02]>> My hands are tied inside the jail.

[00:42:05]>> I don't even I don't even have enough paper.

[00:42:07]>> So, Mr. Evans, I'm going to come talk to you and give you the paperwork so that it can get done and once it's prepared, I can file it for you.

[00:42:13]>> And so, just to be clear, even though we are leaving the jury trial one because the court entered the order for the compy evaluation per court rule, the speed trial uh is Thank you. And the city was ordered to provide discovery to the defendant.

[00:42:33]>> What Mr. Do you know that the best way to get to that to him in score?

[00:42:40]>> Is there um I think if if there is if if I mean is there other stuff other than paper copies? Is there anything else other than documents? I >> a potential copy of everything.

[00:42:57]>> There's a potential 911 recording.

[00:43:00]There's uh custodial statements I read uh that's involved as well. I don't have access. I don't have any of that. And I would like a full discovery. Everything that the uh city or state's going to use in the trial.

[00:43:14]>> And you have a right to that, sir?

[00:43:19]>> I haven't gotten it yet.

[00:43:22]Mr. >> We I can print everything off that's printable. Um as far as electron if there's anything electronic is the only issue. I don't know what um and I can I can go there and play it for him.

[00:43:34]>> And also what case is it that we're taking a trial on the 24th because I didn't get that information. That information wasn't specified either as well. Oh, so >> I know and and I said this, sir, at the time. We'll set all of them for the same day and then based on witness availability and based on what makes sense, we'll just figure out which one goes first that day.

[00:43:55]>> Thank you for clearing that up, your honor.

[00:43:56]>> Yeah. And I I'm just repeating myself, sir.

[00:44:00]>> It never was made clear to me when uh it was officially done. So, I thank you for clearing that up for me, as well as officially explaining to me what a affirmative defense was that Mr. Ionady couldn't legibly or competently explain to me, which is why I wanted him fired.

[00:44:24]>> Mr. I may need to email you then on if I when I review the cases further if there's electronic discovery that needs to be sent to the defendant. Okay.

[00:44:42]All right. Thank you, sir. We'll see you back here on the 12th.

[00:44:46]>> Thank you.

[00:44:51]>> I'm I'm on I'm on mute. Can you hear me?

[00:44:54]>> Yes.

[00:44:56]>> Okay. Um, are they dismissing everything or do I still have the review cases or >> just one second, sir? Mr. Evans, just one second. We're in the middle of something.

[00:45:06]>> Was I found competent or incomp?

[00:45:08]>> No, Mr. Evans. We're not.

[00:45:11]>> Um, now we're about to address. You're here.

[00:45:15]>> Um, >> and this is city versus Evans.

[00:45:18]>> Sanders, it show.

[00:45:21]>> Everybody can come out. 65525 3 A 0549215 4 A231898 4 A 0472552 and 3 A 0312319.

[00:45:39]Um had the parties had an opportunity to review the evaluation?

[00:45:44]>> Yes.

[00:45:47]>> Yes.

[00:45:50]Did either party take exception to the court?

[00:45:55]>> I have an objection.

[00:45:58]>> Object to the court adopting the evaluation.

[00:46:02]>> Uh what's the status of the evaluation?

[00:46:04]Was it competent or incompetent?

[00:46:06]>> I'm not able to proceed.

[00:46:09]>> So that mean they found me incompetent?

[00:46:11]>> Yes.

[00:46:14]>> Okay. Could I see the paperwork on that so I could review it and have that challenged?

[00:46:20]So just to be clear, if you're incompetent, everything gets dismissed.

[00:46:26]>> If you're competent, then everything proceeds.

[00:46:31]>> So I'm that's what I'm asking. Did the doctor find me competent or incompetent?

[00:46:36]>> Incompetent.

[00:46:39]>> Okay. Under what circumstances? What was the what was his reasoning?

[00:46:43]>> Um delusional thinking.

[00:46:48]And what proof did he have on that?

[00:46:53]>> I mean the the interview that he did with you.

[00:46:56]>> Okay. And um being that you said everything is dismissed uh due to delusional thinking uh by law. From what I read at the law library, it said being delusional in itself is not um reason itself to be declared incompetent. that they that you are unable to assist in your own defense because of it.

[00:47:19]So there are two prongs there are two ways that you can find someone unable to proceed. That they don't understand the nature of the proceedings which you clearly do and the evaluator said that um but that you were unable to assist in your own defense due to the delusional thinking.

[00:47:35]>> Well that's uh being with the letter that I sent to you that would directly refute that. Correct.

[00:47:40]>> No that supports that. with the letter I sent to you, it had motions that I wanted filed and whatnot that would prove that I'm able to assist in my defense. Correct?

[00:47:52]>> No, it it was you wouldn't give me any information. You gave me half half information about things. Refused to give the further information when I asked in court. Um >> I well I did declare that the information regarding the evidence that was a matter of secret uh state privilege and then I also declared that uh the motions that I want to file I didn't have access to the law library to get the proper documentations.

[00:48:20]>> I am um I'm I am adopting the evaluation over your objection um and finding that you are unable to proceed in these matters. So the the pre-trial cases are dismissed. All of the reviews are closed pending a further finding of able to proceed. Um the evaluator did not appine that you should be evaluated by DCR prior to release. So you are just released today.

[00:48:47]>> You can this you welcome to appeal this finding this ruling.

[00:48:52]>> Um and you could come to the court and the clerks can tell you how to do that, what paperwork to file.

[00:48:58]>> All right. So I'll be released from jail today. Correct.

[00:49:01]>> And also, can I get the paperwork of the evaluation from the doctor?

[00:49:07]>> Um, you represent yourself, so I think you kind of have a right to it. Um, >> yeah. How do I get that paperwork?

[00:49:14]>> Uh, Mr. Anati, are you able Are we able to print that out for him?

[00:49:18]>> We can print it off and give it to the officers to give to them.

[00:49:21]>> Okay. We'll get that to you today.

[00:49:23]>> Okay.

[00:49:24]>> All right. Thank you, Mr. Evans. Um, >> and also I want I want to put on record that I want to uh file a notice to appeal to the Supreme Court of the state of Washington.

[00:49:33]>> Okay, that's appeals from um courts of limited jurisdiction go to King County Superior Court.

[00:49:40]>> I understand that, but I want to bypass the superior courts and go directly to the Supreme Court due to the circumstances and the nature of the judgment.

[00:49:48]>> Okay, you can you can try to do that. Um um >> I want it on record uh noted if you have >> you have to actually file it. This that means nothing. You have to actually file the documentation. You have to file notice.

[00:50:01]>> That's impossible to do uh from in here.

[00:50:04]You saying when I get out I have to file it.

[00:50:06]>> Yes. Correct. You'll have 30 days to file it.

[00:50:09]>> Okay.

[00:50:10]>> Okay. Um you should know though that the you are still trespassed from the airport.

[00:50:17]Nothing in what I've done today affects that. That is the the airport's trespass notice. It is still fully valid. You will be rearrested.

[00:50:26]Okay.

[00:50:28]So, if even if I'm there now on personal travel, I'll be rearrested.

[00:50:33]>> Um, you have to comply with their rules and restrictions. I'm not going to give you legal advice as to what that that constitutes because you need to look at your trespass notice. But, >> yeah, I was there this time on legal.

[00:50:45]>> We're done. We're done with this case.

[00:50:46]This case is dismissed. So, we don't don't owe me any explanations. I'm just telling you that the trespass order from the airport is still out there. Okay?

[00:50:57]I'm just letting you know.

[00:51:00]>> Okay? So, I can still be arrested um on the false premises cuz they also said I confessed in this case, which was not true.

[00:51:09]>> I am just telling you that the trespass order is still in is still there. That's all I'm telling you.

[00:51:17]Okay. Thank you, sir.

[00:51:18]>> Also, also, would I have I want to fire Mr. Ayonetti as well.

[00:51:23]>> He doesn't represent you. We've already gone through that. He doesn't represent you. You can't >> Okay. Is he going to give me the paperwork that I need for these proceedings?

[00:51:32]>> Score will.

[00:51:35]>> Okay. And the evaluation as well from the doctor.

[00:51:39]>> Yes, I believe we'll be printing that out. Mr. Anati said he would print that out for you.

[00:51:44]>> Okay.

[00:51:45]>> All right. Thank you, sir.

[00:51:46]>> Oh, are the What is going on with the review cases? I guess I haven't heard that.

[00:51:51]>> They're all closed pending a further finding of able to proceed if maybe >> closed.

[00:51:58]What What does that mean?

[00:51:59]>> It means there are no affirmative conditions can or no conditions can be imposed because there's a finding of unable to proceed.

[00:52:09]>> So, they can't be reopened later.

[00:52:11]>> They can.

[00:52:13]So I can have a warrant placed and I don't even know it. Once again, >> well, no, you would have to get notice of a hearing.

[00:52:22]>> Like this time I didn't get notice of the review hearing and they placed a warrant out for failure to appear. I didn't even know I had a a a hearing on the review charges.

[00:52:33]>> This is why it's very important to keep your address updated. My address is uh very um I don't know for lack of a better word. I do a lot of moving around. So I don't have a a steady address that you can always I can always get mail at at the moment. So that's how we got in this position the first time.

[00:52:54]>> Well, that sounds like I mean if you're not going to let us know how to get in touch with you, then you can't complain when we when you don't get noticed.

[00:53:02]>> I can give you an email. Would you be able to contact me by email? And I think we have that listed.

[00:53:07]>> But they never contact gave me a notice of any hearing via email.

[00:53:12]>> Okay. Um we will make a note um email only.

[00:53:21]>> And and I'm still confused as well. The case is open or closed.

[00:53:25]>> Closed.

[00:53:26]>> He's unable unable to proceed >> that. So I'm I'm confused by that. So the the conditions in were imposed.

[00:53:38]There's an allegation that he violated him. He's not found competent. We can't move forward in those violations, but it doesn't invalidate the conditions that were set because those were done at a time that he was competent. Like the Is the court still taking jurisdiction?

[00:53:48]Like I'm still struggling with that.

[00:53:51]>> I can't I can't impose conditions.

[00:53:53]>> The conditions were already imposed though.

[00:53:55]>> I know. And they're stayed. Everything is stayed.

[00:53:57]>> Sure. Sure. But so the case is open but stayed or or is it closed? a better way to characterize it, but it's for all intents and purposes closed effectively >> pending a further finding of able to proceed >> and also would I be able to subpoena any grand jury proceedings that may have taken place as well?

[00:54:19]>> There are no grand juries in courts of limited jurisdiction and I don't believe there are in Washington at all other than federal.

[00:54:26]>> Okay. Okay. And um so you said, "Yeah, I'll get a copy of the evaluation." And you say, "I got 30 days to start filing motions to try to get everything reversed." Right.

[00:54:39]>> At this point, your only avenue is appeal.

[00:54:42]>> Correct.

[00:54:43]>> Okay. All right. Thank you, sir.

[00:54:46]>> So, I think the city is objecting to them being closed in in any way.

[00:54:50]>> So, they're not closed. They're just I mean, I thought we talked about this.

[00:54:53]>> I know, but when we're using words like closed, are there is there going to be a CL for closed disposition.

[00:54:59]>> No, >> because that that's what's going to be in the docket as they're closed. And so in a year or two if this comes up again is it's going to be very difficult to figure out what exactly happened today.

[00:55:09]>> In two years it's too late.

[00:55:10]Jurisdictions run.

[00:55:12]>> Sure. There's some situations where that that wouldn't be the case. But uh so the cases are open is all I'm trying to understand.

[00:55:20]>> Yes, they are not closed closed. They're just >> Okay. Okay. Okay. So would you be able to clarify that for me miss uh your honor in layman terms so I can get an understanding because you said it's not closed but it's open closed which is kind of difficult for me to understand.

[00:55:38]>> I I am you guys are right I should be use more careful language. The cases are open they they are stayed which means frozen essentially >> unless a there's a further finding by a doctor that you are able to proceed.

[00:55:54]Would that be able to be done in the appellet courts or the state supreme court overturning his uh findings or what how do you get the proceedings to be found? How do you get that overwritten basically what the doctor prescribe >> or diagnation I haven't come across where there's a an individual wanting to contest the finding. Um >> yeah, based on I I don't have the law library's information in front of me, but based on the information I read got from the law library, uh a defendant cannot be declared incompetent by delusional being delusional in itself.

[00:56:40]>> And I just I explained to you what the what the evaluator app that your delusion is impeding your ability to assist in your own defense. That's what the evaluator am I am I characterizing that correctly Mr. Mercer Mr. That's what it it sounded like to me.

[00:56:57]>> In what way though? How is it impeding?

[00:57:01]>> Um you're asserting defenses that don't exist, >> such as >> uh um the stuff about the case in Louisiana.

[00:57:17]>> I'm I asserted evidence that has a seal on it. So they the only way he can find out that it doesn't uh what I'm saying is not true is to get the seal broken on the evidence which is under state secret privilege. And the only way you can get that broken is by orders of the president or Chief Justice Roberts, >> okay, >> of the United States Supreme Court.

[00:57:39]>> So when you get all your ducks in a row to get that happening so that the court can see it, um it sounds very far-fetched. I've never heard of anything similar happening on a state case that the US Supreme Court would involve themselves, much less that any one justice would have authority to unseal something. Um I'm again I'm adopting this finding.

[00:58:05]>> You can appeal.

[00:58:07]>> Is everything that we spoke about today on the record? Would I be able to get uh recordings of all the subpoena recordings of all the hearings including what we talking about today? They are all online available for you to listen to anytime you want.

[00:58:22]>> Okay? And they all can be subpoenaed by the uh state supreme court and whatnot to be overturned or sealed. Also, >> they are not going to do any investigation on your behalf. If you're appealing, you have to do all the investigation, >> right? No, I don't need them to uh do the investigation. Everything's pretty much said and done. The only thing is the assumption that you guys don't believe the evidence is uh under state secret privilege and I am who I'm telling you I am. So you're believing I'm delusional. Am I correct?

[00:58:52]>> That's correct.

[00:58:54]>> Right. So you y'all making assumptions that's not true that I have to go through the process and get everything removed to the federal courts to prove that it's true which is going to be under seal at that moment. But I'll give the state supreme court a chance to make the adjustments and override.

[00:59:12]>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Evans. You'll be released today and you can get working on all that.

[00:59:17]All right. Thank you, sir.

[00:59:19]>> All right. So, we're done here.

[00:59:20]>> We're done here.

[00:59:22]>> Appreciate it.

[00:59:23]>> Well, guys, we have come to the end of these two proceedings and the end of what seemed to be a very long and drawn out case. For those of us that saw all five appearances by Mr. Evans. Um, before we address how this thing concluded, let's just talk about that first appearance, which was his fourth appearance. Um, in this uh video, we see him, you know, wanting to subpoena a lot of people obviously that he could not subpoena, that wouldn't be able to be subpoenaed. We seen him still going hard on the chief thing and and being the chief of the sovereign tribe.

[01:00:02]And then we also see where he constantly kept saying how he understood certain things uh that he didn't understand because we we find out that the the case that he was trying to use to prove his inn innocence or to prove whatever it is that he was trying to prove was a case of of of public record, right? Like it was a matter of public record. like anybody could see these documents, but he kept talking about how, you know, they needed to be unsealed by someone.

[01:00:31]But the fact that she kept trying to explain to him, listen, this is a matter of public record and he wasn't even really getting that just showed how much he's going through in his mind, how much he's struggling with mental health.

[01:00:45]Right. And another thing that we see that I thought was wild throughout this proceeding throughout these proceedings was how many times he tried to throw Mr. Ionati under the bus. I mean, you know, if you've been following this case, um, many of times, no matter how much poor Mr. Ionat tried to help him out, he's tried to fire him. He even tried to fire him after finding out that, listen, your case is going to be dismissed or put on hold. we're going to let you out today because you were found incompetent. And that's what eventually happened, right?

[01:01:18]Because he couldn't understand certain things in that fourth appearance, they ended up doing the competency hearing and he was found incompetent, right?

[01:01:26]Because his delusions was impeding his ability to help defend himself. So even then, he's still trying to appeal like, "Listen, brother, this is what you've been trying to do. You've been trying to get out of here." But yet because of what he's going through in his mind and also I don't think it's only because of what he's going through in his mind, but I think he absolutely wants to prove like listen I'm not delusional like you guys think because obviously he believes a lot of the things he's saying. So he you know he's not even trying to gras you can get out of here today even though he knows and if you remember what she said about the doctor like the the doctor said he clearly knows what's going on. He clearly understand understands what these cases are are about. And if you notice when he first jumped on, he was like, "Is everything going to be dismissed today?" So, this case, this whole thing was very weird. Um, I'm I'm just as as confused as the prosecutor was. Um, yeah, this was a wild case.

[01:02:24]I've never seen anything like this.

[01:02:26]Like, I I wouldn't have been surprised if he wouldn't have if he would have just right before he got off camera like, "I told you I was the tribal chief." you know, like I I just wouldn't have been surprised at anything happening in this case after seeing how all of this played out. And the the poor judge, man, uh every time um she tried to dismiss and and and just close it down, either Mr. Evans or the prosecutor has something to say. But I will say this, man, it's definitely nothing funny about mental health. You know, I I don't think that that's a joke. I don't think what we see Mr. Evans going through is a joke. um you know going through in your mind is a very serious thing and believe it or not many people struggle with it.

[01:03:09]Maybe not on that level but just everyday people because of the stress because of the different things that this life brings. They're going through their own uh mental health and spiritual battles in many different ways. So I didn't find any of that comical. I definitely found certain things that happen in the case comical, but I never think anything that somebody's going through in their mind is a comical thing. But prayerfully this guy, you know, he stays away from the airport because they clearly don't want him there. And whatever is going on between him and the airport is probably whatever he's going through in his mind, he may used to work there. They didn't really say he has some type of connection to that airport. It's something going on where he just feels that he needs to be there because if they they're constantly saying we don't want him here, then that means he keeps popping up there for some reason. So there's probably some type of connection in his mind to that airport.

[01:04:03]Like I said, prayerfully Mr. Evans gets gets the help that he needs. You know, he goes on and does what he needs to do, but this case is still there. So if they do find him competent down the road, they can open the case back up. But with that being said, guys, um I appreciate all you guys that hung in there for the long haul. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. This is Sovereign Citizens Hall of Fame and it is al always a blessing to have you guys with me. And with that being said, guys, once again, this is Sovereign Citizens Court. And for now, guys, court is adjourned. God bless.

[01:04:36]>> I'm not threatening you.

[01:04:38]>> Say one more word and that's cont 30 days.

[01:04:41]30 days.