The MOST INSANE Courtroom MELTDOWNS I’ve EVER Covered… Absolute Pro Se DISASTER!

Added: 2026-05-11

[00:00:00]Hey guys, welcome back. In today's video, I was originally going to break down the jury trial of the law sovereign citizen morons, which was supposedly set to be streamed live, but that never actually happened. No broadcast, no courtroom footage, nothing. At first that felt like a dead end, >> [music] >> but it honestly worked out perfectly because what I've got instead is even more chaotic. Today we diving into not one, but two completely unhinged courtroom moments. One out of Florida and another from Washington. The first case features someone who seems totally lost in how the legal system actually works. And just when you think it can't get worse, the second one somehow takes things to an even more absurd level. So buckle in because this quickly turns into a master class in courtroom confusion, and it only gets more ridiculous from here.

[00:00:53]That one was ours.

[00:00:56]I don't seem to I hid it from myself and just because you ordered me to stay away from one [music] cookie. Please state I apologize for interrupting. He's no longer there. Corrections took him away.

[00:01:09]Okay. I lost my right to be heard, and I'm representing myself, your honor. I just got back from the last courtroom where I was r r. Um are you ready to hear what I have to say, your honor?

[00:01:19]>> I am. Right, cool. So, um I would like to inform you, your honor, that there is two open lawsuits. One one against this court system for wrongfully finding probable cause of police misconduct and violating my 6th and 14th Amendment and due process, which led to false imprisonment. Uh-huh. Against the Miami [music] Beach Police Department for multiple false arrests where they have violated my constitutional rights and multiple United States laws. This situation is very serious, your honor, because I now have to file another lawsuit for attempted murder and attempted vehicle manslaughter. I say vehicle manslaughter because these two police officers that followed me, stopped me November 6th is the same two police officers that watched me park my bike on 10th and Ocean, paced back and forth uh next to my bike on 10th and Ocean, and then hit me off my bike while I ran onto the sidewalk, also hitting two other pedestrians. So, that was vehicle manslaughter. Vehicular manslaughter, you say. Well, I hate to interrupt your jail-issued breakfast, but manslaughter of any kind requires one very important detail, an actual deceased victim. And unless I missed the headline where stupidity became a legally recognized cause of death, you somehow still qualify as alive. So, at this point, your argument isn't just weak. [music] It's completely missing the one element it needs to exist. In other words, your logic didn't just fail, it straight-up drove off the road, flipped three times, and took your case with it. They never tried to attempt to pull me over like the eight foreman said they tried to that I tried to evade them.

[00:03:02]Tried to pull me over because if I tried to run away, why did I park my bike? And you see me park my bike on 10th Street.

[00:03:09]So, let me continue. There's another one that I have to file for attempted murder because when when they when they said, "To hands behind your back." They kept me, they prevented my hands from going behind my back while covering my face and mouth.

[00:03:22]Uh-huh. That is attempted murder. So, when it Now, let me start. November 6th, right? And I've had this bike since February. November 6th, these officers witnessed me talking to three girls or whatever. They followed me for three blocks and then took the same right turn that I turn and then I made a U-turn onto the sidewalk and then they stopped following me. Then they approached me when I was talking to my friend on a bike lane on Ocean Drive between 11th and 10th Street. That is when they wrote the ticket. And they they they if I don't walk my bike home my electrical bicycle, then I will then then I'll be arrested. So, I walked my bike home and I went back to the same officer, Officer Rivera, after I did my research and I told him that because my bicycle has pedals, it is required it is considered an electrical bicycle. So, if you try to arrest me for riding my electrical bicycle, I will file another lawsuit against and then I rode my bicycle November 6th and no one said anything. I rode my bicycle November 7th, no one said anything. I've had this bike since February 8th. Um I've got pulled over for running a red light. I even called the sergeant. The regular officer and the sergeant never said my bike was not street legal. This was March. This was July where I got pulled over again. I I requested the sergeant. The regular sergeant and the um I mean the regular officer and the sergeant never said that my bike was not street legal at all. So, what I'm saying is um to you, you have a do this the civil code of conduct.

[00:04:51]You have to follow the law at all times.

[00:04:53]It's your duty to follow the law. And based on the 14th Amendment, I have the right to be treated equally. So, if they're not um arresting DoorDash drivers, Uber Eats drivers for riding their electrical bicycle, you cannot take me in jail for riding my electrical bicycle. This is what I explained to the judge previously and I got O R R. And they did their public defender had um did their research. They found out that with a it um with pedals, it's still considered an electrical bicycle. And I even informed this officer and he even seen me riding southbound. He made eye contact with me um November 8th on Saturday. He made eye contact with me on no while driving southbound on Ocean Drive. If if I was riding something illegal, right? If I didn't go back up to him and tell him that if he tries to arrest me for riding my electrical bicycle, he will be sued. Why didn't he just pull over and pull me over? If if what he said that happened on 9th Street, why why didn't he pull me over?

[00:05:50]Why didn't he pull on his golf cart and and pull me over? He did no such thing because that is a lie. He lied on the A form and I'm proving it to you because I parked my bike down this one block away.

[00:06:01]So, if I really tried to run away from the police, why did I park my bike one block away? And based on the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, anything that rooted from illegal activity cannot be used against me in the court of law.

[00:06:14]>> Well, that's not actually how the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine works, as clarified in Wong Sun versus United States. It applies when evidence is obtained through illegal police conduct, and it can be used to support a motion to suppress that specific evidence, not to magically erase an entire case or turn a bad situation into an instant dismissal. And your position falls apart even quicker when your own account keeps shifting. First, you said the police knocked you off your bike. Then suddenly the bike was a block away like it developed a mind of its own. Before throwing around constitutional phrases like magic spells, it [music] might help to lock down a consistent version of events because right now, it's not the law that's collapsing, it's the story.

[00:07:00]So, all the charges has to be dismissed from riding my light riding with a suspended license. I don't need a license to ride my electric bicycle. Um vehicle registration, I do not have to register my electric bicycle. And [music] driving with a license suspended, I don't need to have um a valid light driver's license to ride my electric bicycle. And this all >> That's on his traffic case he received ROR. Mhm. We're good. Anyway.

[00:07:27]Yes, so um what I what I like to say is that um also, the King is across the street from the police department. So, no police officer can say that they don't see other electric bicycles and other bikes riding [music] um riding on the beach.

[00:07:43]So, it's no it's no excuse not even just pointing it out that they lied on the A form.

[00:07:49]And it's all my work cuz I even have a video. There was electrical bicycles passing by November 6th as they was writing me a ticket for my electrical bicycle, which was a blatant violation of my 14th Amendment. So, they they continued to write a ticket for my electrical bicycle as someone pulled over and said, "What's going on?" A restaurant worker that usually parks their electrical bicycle right there on Ocean Drive. You cannot be a police officer and and say you don't see electrical dirt bikes riding on the boardwalk and electrical bicycles riding on Ocean Drive because there's 15-year-olds with electrical dirt bikes since last year that has been riding up and down Ocean Drive and no one has said anything to them. So, it would be a blatant violation to arrest me or harass me for riding my So, I would like to be re-arraigned with this as well cuz I'm not sure why it was divided into two judges at all.

[00:08:44]And the public defender already looked at the law if you want to look at the law.

[00:08:48]Based on the fact that my pedals I mean my bike has pedals is considered electrical bicycle.

[00:08:54]All right then. So, it sounds to me like you already raised the issue judge of your pedals and your electric bicycle.

[00:09:03]I myself am dealing with four counts of battery on a law enforcement officer, >> [music] >> one count of resisting officer without offering to do violence, one count of felony marijuana possession, and one misdemeanor arrest. So, those are the cases I'm dealing with. Now, whether or not your bike has pedals on it. I I'd like to include your honor that my older brother >> [music] >> passed away because someone hit him off his motorcycle 2016. I would never run away from the police.

[00:09:33]The fact that they waited till I hopped on my bike to try to hit me, to try to build a false narrative like I was evading them is completely illegal. They waited till I hopped back on my bike after seeing me hop off my bike.

[00:09:47]So, that is what? Vehicle manslaughter.

[00:09:50]Once again, you are very much alive, very much present, [music] and still confidently insisting you were somehow manslaughtered.

[00:09:58]The problem is manslaughter isn't a metaphor for a bad day in court. It requires an actual death, not just frustration, confusion, or an argument that didn't go your way. So, no, nobody killed you in any legal sense. What we're actually watching is a claim that collapses under its own weight the moment it meets reality. And just when things couldn't get more tense, the judge is about to step in and weigh in on this entire exchange. And from the expression on her face, she's clearly not impressed and is already running out of patience with how far this has gone off the rails. So, now I have to file another It would only be a computer manslaughter if you were dead, but you are quite uh uh chatty for a dead person. So, I really can't find that you're dead. Why did they Why did they attempt to murder me?

[00:10:46]They covered the whole >> Oh, well, that's a horse of a different color. So, uh what I have to deal with was what's written on the arrest affidavit, not your constitutional arguments, which may very well be filed in a different court on a different day.

[00:11:01]>> [music] >> I have to deal with the four corners of the document here. Yes, based on the four corners of the Based on the four corners of the document. I'm trying to find probable cause on counts 1 2 3 4 5 6.

[00:11:16]And let me ask correction, was the resisting without violence dealt with in this immediate court or not?

[00:11:23]>> [music] >> What? I'd like to Your Your um is Stop.

[00:11:32]Keep I'm trying to get an answer from Corrections as to whether or not the resisting without financial was managed misdemeanor or or not.

[00:11:42]Your Honor, if I have to pay any type of bond then I will file another lawsuit against this court system All righty then. Feel free to do so. Probable cause is found found on counts 1 2 3 and And the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine?

[00:11:58]Um, not rooted from illegal activity. It cannot be used against me in a court of law. Well, that Yes, it's a You're saying that you're being constitutionally background for a motion to suppress evidence. Yes, I read that case once. So, counts 1 through 4, the bond is $2,000.

[00:12:16]Count 5, the bond is just $1,000.

[00:12:20]Count 6, the bond is $1,000.

[00:12:24]7 is ROR. Judge Victoria Singular I >> I am Judge Victoria Singular. Not ROR.

[00:12:32]All righty then. I I will file a tort Please feel free to file whatever things you think are appropriate. It's always something to watch when a defendant thinks threatening to sue the court is going to improve their situation.

[00:12:44]Spoiler [music] alert, it never does. If anything, it usually does the exact opposite, >> [music] >> signaling to everyone in the room that there's a fundamental misunderstanding of how the legal system actually works.

[00:12:56]But just when you think you've seen the peak of courtroom confusion, we're shifting scenes from Florida to Bellingham, where things somehow manage to get even more frustrating. And that's saying something because the bar was already set extremely low. This is case number 5A0868584.

[00:13:17]I did review the report that was uh completed and filed by DSHS.

[00:13:24]And does uh the city want to be heard at all? The city would ask the court to adopt uh DSHS's recommendations.

[00:13:32]Or find >> Does defense want to be heard at all?

[00:13:36]Yes.

[00:13:37]>> Your honor, we also ask the court to enter this finding and we also ask the court to withdraw the attorney uh send attorney due to breakdown of attorney-client relationship.

[00:13:48]>> Yeah.

[00:13:49]And I would like to be heard on the record as well. [music] The court does adopt the uh report that was filed by DSHS finding competency and the >> Get uncomfortable. Good. Cool.

[00:14:02]Sweet. That was by Western, right? Yes, ma'am.

[00:14:05]I'll check that box.

[00:14:09]So now you can I go through a full for the quality so that then I represent myself and you are no longer Mhm. Okay.

[00:14:16]We're not going to do that today, though.

[00:14:20]Well, I'd like to I'd like to do that because I'd like to, you know, not have the public defenders involved anymore in obstructing, you know, my rights. And then two, I need >> certain to the court that you need legal representation. So, I'm not going to grant that motion today.

[00:14:35]>> I don't cuz cuz well, can can you can you ask can you answer this for me? I did a motion to revise the original anti-harassment protection order and four different four or five different judges recused themselves on that. Are you aware of that motion to revise?

[00:14:51]>> That's not before the court here today.

[00:14:54]It's no way it's it's really relevant, right? Because there's no probable cause to arrest me and hold me for this charge.

[00:15:01]>> Found Mr. Spidell, so Well, then I will and hasn't been presented to me. I haven't seen any probable cause affidavit or anything like that. And if you read the motion to revise the original anti-harassment protection order, you'd see that there was no evidence in that hearing for of harassment. All I did was try to let the prosecutor's office know of Brady Giglio material committed by Crystal Chappell.

[00:15:25]Right? Can you let me speak, please?

[00:15:27]You're being Yes, I want this to be recorded. You're being recorded and you're making admissions that might be against your personal interest in this case. No, no, that's not true because I'm I'm 100 I want the truth to be known. I have nothing to hide, okay? So And we are setting So you guys are obstructing though. You guys are are doing the obstruction here, okay? So I want this to be heard on the record that that I just reached out to the prosecutor's office to let them know about Brady Giglio material committed by Crystal Chappell and I was concerned that maybe she would be involved in high-profile cases like the the cop that I heard was was killed and I would hate to see anything overturned once this comes down the pipe. Yeah, I'm sure the court is just thrilled to hear Brady violation being thrown around like it's a magic word that erases a conviction.

[00:16:18]But that's not how any of this works. A Brady versus Maryland claim only applies when there's actual suppression of material exculpatory evidence, not as a casual slogan for I don't like the outcome. And honestly, the more you keep talking, the more it starts to sound less like a legal argument and more like someone searching for any technical loophole to undo a result they already know stands against them, especially in a protection order violation case where the facts are typically pretty direct.

[00:16:48]You're not exactly building the strong wrongly accused narrative you seem to think you are. Focusing on your case and not using Yeah, this this is my case, right? I've been sitting here in jail for 60 days without probable cause.

[00:17:01]Probable cause is already determined, sir, so you are not sitting >> It's it's not it's not a smiling matter.

[00:17:07]Then tell me what the probable cause was. heard in this case. So do you have to set for trial, your honor? We're setting the matter for trial.

[00:17:16]Okay.

[00:17:19]Then I I ma'am, I think that you're you're stepping your bounds and you're obstructing justice here because if you read that that motion to to revise the protection order, why have four different judges recuse themselves? Why did the gentleman just before you just recuse himself?

[00:17:37]>> [music] >> You know, everybody's playing hot potato with accountability, but you're the only one who seems that I'm not recusing.

[00:17:42]>> You want to break the law. Here I am.

[00:17:45]Right, but you're not hearing me.

[00:17:47]Oh, I am hearing you, sir, and what you're saying doesn't fit with the [music] facts of the case.

[00:17:54]There was probably >> Then what are the facts? Then we're moving forward with trial. You'll get your trial on the merits, sir.

[00:18:02]Okay, but I know that you guys are just going to dismiss it before trial happens cuz you don't want a jury to hear about all your misconduct. Well, I don't mind the jury hearing what you perceive as misconduct.

[00:18:12]>> [music] >> If it's Okay.

[00:18:15]All right, then I I'm looking forward to that. If you let us have a moment, we'll set your trial date.

[00:18:21]But from my calculations, Mr. uh >> [music] >> Speedle has been in uh we're we have speedy running from November 5th to December 8th when the order was entered for competency. And so after the competency was on today, we're running from So it's 33 days We're 33 days into speedy trial. So I believe we set by January 27th, 2026, we would be within the 60 days. Okay. So No, that's not true cuz I was arrested on October 28th.

[00:18:53]Let's see about officer Today's day 59.

[00:18:58]Or day 65 depending on how you look at it.

[00:19:01]>> 20th, we don't have a jury because of the holiday and that complicates getting a jury and the 13th Shame on you.

[00:19:11]proto.

[00:19:13]If it's only for So we have the 6th and the 27th, which is pretty close to You know, the 27th you said is within speedy, so.

[00:19:23]I believe so. I'm going by what the jail records say of 11:3 as the booking date.

[00:19:29]Okay. Well, I object. You guys You guys Aren't you You guys swear oaths to uphold the Constitution? Aren't you supposed to protect my rights and not violate them?

[00:19:38]Why don't I get a speedy trial? I'm certainly trying to protect your rights, sir.

[00:19:42]Um Well, then why Why are you even taking me to trial without probable cause? That's malicious prosecution. I can't keep answering the same issue about probable cause. It's already been de- Well, then can you read to me for the record what the probable cause is?

[00:19:56]Cuz all all in my records I just see it says warrant. And And warrant is not probable cause.

[00:20:02]And probable cause is determined before a warrant [music] is issued in this court. So explain to me then what the probable cause is, why I've been sitting in jail.

[00:20:12]>> [music] >> And if you would work with your attorney, you would have all of that information.

[00:20:16]>> I am my attorney. That might honestly be one of the most misguided statements you've made so far. No, you don't become your own attorney just because you announce it in the middle of a courtroom. The lawyer standing next to you is still your legal counsel until the judge formally accepts a request to proceed pro se or appoints new representation. Court isn't run on declarations or confidence, it runs on procedure. So no matter how strongly you insist otherwise, saying I'm my own lawyer now doesn't actually make it happen. So I'm working with you now.

[00:20:47]What Tell me Tell me what the probable cause is for my arrest. You can't present any motion where you're representing yourself, sir.

[00:20:55]Okay, well, I don't understand how you can sleep at night with this kind of misconduct. I mean, like You know, all your colleagues have have have you know, passed the buck around, you know, playing hot potato, recusing themselves.

[00:21:09]You can be And you can't even tell me what the probable cause is. You just say that it's already been established.

[00:21:14]Well, that doesn't fly. January 27th, 9:00 is your jury trial.

[00:21:20]Status?

[00:21:23]Do we set status on the Friday on current matters on the Monday?

[00:21:28]Your status >> You're obviously not a Christian or a follower of Jesus Christ. I can tell that.

[00:21:33]And you're going to have to answer for this someday, ma'am.

[00:21:37]You will be judged. January 26th at 8:30 in the morning for status.

[00:21:43]Readiness?

[00:21:45]January 12th, 8:30.

[00:21:49]And what about you, Mr. Good? What Where's my probable cause? Where's my discovery?

[00:21:53]>> [music] >> On the same dates, all right. Out of custody dates for those matters are the same only at 1:30.

[00:22:10]I'll put a note in here for that.

[00:22:13]Yeah, put that note in here.

[00:22:19]Now, obviously the court wants Mr. Spidel to be represented through a jury trial.

[00:22:27]>> I'll represent myself.

[00:22:30]Only if the court allows it.

[00:22:33]Okay, well, that's that's not fair and that's against my constitutional rights, okay?

[00:22:38]Yeah, you you're you're holding me without probable cause and then you're forcing me to have a public pretender who's not going to uphold my rights or or is actually actually actively working against me.

[00:22:51]>> [music] >> If you're not willing to work with your current attorney, we can find a conflict counsel to assist you.

[00:23:02]I want a speedy trial. I want to represent myself.

[00:23:05]And I want it I want it today. Today is day 65 of my incarceration without probable cause. That's malicious prosecution according to RCW 9.62.100.

[00:23:16]But I can go through the colloquy, but we can have standby counsel at the very least.

[00:23:22]No. Oh, yeah. Yeah, I'll do standby counsel, but I want the Faretta quality, so I'm representing myself so that then I can contact the prosecutor directly from the jail. I can get my discovery and everything like that.

[00:23:35]Uh it would be I think against his personal benefit to be >> This isn't a joke, ma'am. Why are you laughing?

[00:23:43]>> legal representation.

[00:23:45]You know, present yourself in front of a jury the way you're presenting yourself in court would not be to your benefit.

[00:23:53]And you I beg to differ. I beg to differ. No.

[00:23:57]You're not some seasoned attorney handling hundreds of cases a year.

[00:24:01]You're just another person who's convinced himself he understands more than judges, lawyers, and the entire legal system put together. And now, apparently, the plan was to take matters into your own hands and modify a protection order without going through any of the required legal process.

[00:24:18]That's not legal strategy or expertise.

[00:24:21]That's the kind of decision-making that takes an already serious situation and escalates it straight into new legal trouble. Sir, you do.

[00:24:29]So, uh if we do go to trial on January 27th, which it's set for, uh I would encourage you to at the very least have standby counsel to assist you.

[00:24:43]Okay. Yes. So, we'll try and find conflict counsel >> [music] >> and uh in short order so that you can speak with an attorney about your jury trial, which is coming up now.

[00:24:56]Okay, but in the meantime, I would like Mr. Good to provide me with my discovery and the probable cause affidavit and also and also a copy of my my motion to revise the original anti-harassment protection order. That's not for this court.

[00:25:11]That's a different court.

[00:25:13]Ma'am, this is a kangaroo court then.

[00:25:16]All right.

[00:25:17]>> be ashamed of yourself.

[00:25:18]>> Your opinion, um Be that as it may, yep. The uh discovery has been provided and if you would work with your attorney, you would know all the information.

[00:25:27]>> my attorney, ma'am.

[00:25:28]You would know all that information.

[00:25:29]>> to work with the prosecutor because I'm representing myself, okay?

[00:25:34]Yeah. Not at this moment. You are going We are going to find you conflict counsel to assess what the No, that's I object. I object to that. I am fully competent enough, just like the 1077 found, right, that I can I'm confident enough to stand trial by myself. Just because the court finds you competent to stand trial doesn't automatically mean you're competent to represent yourself.

[00:25:57]Those are two completely different legal standards. And whether you agree with it or not, the court stepping in on that issue is actually about protecting your rights under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, not taking them away. Because at the end of the day, self-representation isn't just about confidence. It's about understanding procedure, law, and consequence. And based on the arguments being made here, allowing that switch would likely turn an already difficult trial into something even more chaotic than it needs to be.

[00:26:30]So, if we are going to go through that colloquy and allow Mr. Spidel to uh represent himself as standby counsel, hopefully. Yes. Um I can do that now.

[00:26:41]So, we >> Yes, [music] please. Yes, your I'm opposed to Huh, thank you, God.

[00:26:46]Thank you.

[00:26:50]Thank you.

[00:26:52]Otherwise, I'm not >> Okay, you have the constitutional right to represent yourself if you choose to do so.

[00:27:24]It must be knowing and voluntary.

[00:27:27]And I'm going to make clear on the record this colloquy that you wish to waive your right to represent yourself and that you're fully aware of the hazards that you may face and the disadvantages of self-representation.

[00:27:41]Do you understand that if you cannot afford to pay for an attorney to only partially pay, that and you have been deemed eligible at this point, that you can uh have conflict counsel uh take over this case with you?

[00:27:57]I I understand that I can I can request counsel, but I don't waive any rights, especially my right to a speedy trial, and I wish to represent myself. The only way we're going to get through this colloquy and help me make a determination that you can represent yourself as if you answer the questions specifically. Okay, then you can you repeat the the question? I can, yes.

[00:28:17]Do you understand that you have been deemed eligible for a public defender?

[00:28:22]If you wish to, we can find conflict counsel to assist and take over the case with you.

[00:28:29]Yes. Have you ever studied law?

[00:28:32]I I have studied law, yes. Have you ever represented yourself or any other defendant in a criminal action?

[00:28:39]Yes, I have represented myself.

[00:28:42]And have you ever um or do you know that you're charged at this time with the anti-harassment protection order violation, two counts on this case?

[00:28:53]Yes. You understand the charge? Okay.

[00:28:56]Um do you know that if you're found guilty of this of these charges that you could be sentenced uh up to these are gross, right? 364 days in jail and a $5,000 maximum fine on each count.

[00:29:13]Yes.

[00:29:15]Uh Do you know that if you represent yourself, you're on your own unless there's standby counsel and that the court cannot tell you how you should try your case or even advise you on how to try your case?

[00:29:30]Yes. Do you understand that you have the right to have your uh to have your guilt or innocence decided by a jury?

[00:29:39]Yes. You understand a jury consists of six people chosen from the community?

[00:29:45]Yes. Are you familiar with the rules of evidence?

[00:29:50]Uh no.

[00:29:51]Do you know that the rules of evidence govern what evidence may or may not be introduced at trial and if representing yourself, you must abide by these rules of evidence?

[00:30:02]Yes.

[00:30:05]Do you Are you familiar with the rules of criminal procedure?

[00:30:10]No.

[00:30:12]These are rules that govern uh the way in which a criminal action is tried in this court. Do you understand that?

[00:30:20]Yes.

[00:30:22]And do you know that if you decide to take the witness stand, you must present your testimony by asking questions of yourself and you cannot just take the stand and tell a story, your story.

[00:30:34]Yes. You understand you must proceed question by question through your testimony if you choose to testify.

[00:30:41]Yes.

[00:30:42]>> [music] >> Why don't you want an attorney to assist?

[00:30:46]Because they're not working for me, they're working against me. Refusing to let a qualified attorney question witnesses and present arguments that could actually strengthen your position is, in practical terms, a self-inflicted setback in court. A competent lawyer understands how to challenge testimony, raise objections at the right moments, and prevent you from making statements that undermine your own credibility.

[00:31:10]Without that structure, things can unravel quickly. At this point, if a jury trial like this were ever streamed, it would be less about legal strategy and more about watching someone unintentionally weaken their own case in real time, turning what should be a controlled courtroom process into something far more chaotic than it needs to be.

[00:31:31]Okay.

[00:31:33]Um Have there been any threats or promises that have been made to induce you to waive your right to counsel?

[00:31:42]Uh no threats or promises.

[00:31:45]Do you realize that if you proceed without an attorney and you do not properly present a defense, subpoena witnesses, or otherwise represent yourself in a competent manner, that you will not be able to obtain a reversal of a conviction on the grounds that you received ineffective representation?

[00:32:03]Yes, I'm aware.

[00:32:06]All right. Then again, the court would advise that you would be far better served by a trained attorney than you can be by yourself. You've already indicated that you're not familiar with the rules of evidence or criminal procedure.

[00:32:19]Um and the court would again strongly urge you not to try to represent yourself.

[00:32:27]But also in light of the penalty that you might suffer if you're found guilty of two charges, and the difficulties of representing yourself, Is it still your desire to represent yourself and give up your right to be represented by a trained attorney?

[00:32:44]Yes.

[00:32:46]Is this decision entirely voluntary on your part?

[00:32:51]Yes.

[00:32:57]The court finds that you have knowingly and voluntarily waived your right to counsel and you are permitted to represent yourself. However, given your lack of knowledge of the rules of evidence and criminal procedure, the court is going to assign standby counsel to assist you in this trial >> [music] >> and and would encourage you to work with this counsel so that you can present [music] your case in a proper fashion and according to the rules of evidence and criminal procedure.

[00:33:31]So, we will attempt to find conflict counsel to assist you with the trial.

[00:33:37]There's a lot involved in preparing. You indicated that you've represented yourself in the past. I'm not sure which case that would be when I'm looking at your criminal history, but in any case, you've indicated that to the court. So, I have factored that into the determination that you can represent yourself.

[00:33:55]So, as soon as we can find conflict counsel, we'll advise them to get in contact with you so they can assist you in the preparation of the case.

[00:34:05]Okay. Well, in the meantime, all the real assistance I would need is just a copy of the the court rules.

[00:34:12]Okay.

[00:34:12]>> So, if I could get that in then I could study them and I don't I wouldn't need any assistance from um from an attorney at all. Because spending a month in jail suddenly turns you into someone who's mastered the complex world of legal procedure and courtroom rules that attorneys spend years studying in law school and then even longer applying in real cases.

[00:34:33]Reading a few legal documents while inside doesn't magically convert anyone into a trained trial lawyer. If anything, it tends to do the opposite, creating just enough confidence to start making serious mistakes while believing you figured out the entire system. Okay.

[00:34:49]We will see what we can do about that.

[00:34:51]Is there anything else from the city's perspective that needs to be placed on the record today?

[00:34:57]No, your honor.

[00:34:58]Um counsel or Mr. Spidel, anything else that you'd like to that hasn't already been placed on the record that you would like to have placed on the record today?

[00:35:08]Um just the the fact that I'm still waiting on discovery. So, if Mr. Good can please you know, get that to me in my cell and also copy of the probable cause affidavit by any deputies working the case. And also I require a copy of my motion to revise the original protection order.

[00:35:30]Again, that's not a matter before this court. We don't have jurisdiction on the original order. No, I'm well, I'm asking like the court.

[00:35:39]The one in this court.

[00:35:41]Yeah. Yeah, I'm I did a motion to revise prior to my arrest.

[00:35:45]>> The other orders are out of different jurisdictions.

[00:35:49]So, that's count >> No, I did a motion to revise the protection order.

[00:35:54]Whatcom County Superior.

[00:35:56]So, [music] the only one that we can that we have jurisdiction over is the one that was entered in this court.

[00:36:03]So, if that's what you're referencing then >> [music] >> we can we can certainly address that at some point. Um discovery has already been provided. Did you want counsel to previous counsel to provide that to conflict and it would have to be you know, reviewed for redaction and such. Yes, sir. Okay.

[00:36:21]>> [music] >> All right, we'll get the materials that we can to you and to conflict counsel once we have conflict counsel on board.

[00:36:28]Well, I would in the meantime, I would like it uh to me cuz I don't require conflict counsel. So, I don't want that to hold up, um you know, me getting my hands on on these documents. We'll see what we can do. The court's closed tomorrow, just so you're aware.

[00:36:43]Okay, but um did my former attorney here, did do they have the discovery and everything? So, can't they just provide it to me? As long as it's properly As long as it's properly redacted, they should be able to provide it. The previous counsel had that.

[00:36:57]But, >> But, counsel, you need to review for any uh appropriate redaction.

[00:37:05]Pursuant to the law. I understand. Yeah, I can All right.

[00:37:08]>> Okay. Mr. Bybel, thank you, counsel.

[00:37:10]Thank you, Mr. Good. Thank you, ma'am.

[00:37:12]Then, we're going to switch to the initial office.

[00:37:15]Oh, this is the set for trial. Uh well, I need to read it over before I sign it.

[00:37:19]So, >> You're All you're signing for is Thank you. Okay.

[00:37:24]Sign to the dates there and also to abide by the previous imposed conditions of release.

[00:37:30]If they want >> Yeah, I don't Well, I don't agree I object to the dates, you know, because I want a speedy trial within 60 days. So, I'm not going to sign that unless it's under duress.

[00:37:39]Just just it's fine. You have notice of the dates. No, it's it's not fine. So, I'm not going to sign anything at this at this moment. Sorry. For you not to sign, counsel, if you want to put in there refuse to sign, that's fine, too.

[00:37:51]Yeah.

[00:37:52]Okay, I got it.

[00:37:53]Thank you.

[00:37:55]Thank you, ma'am.

[00:37:56]Have a good day. It's been a while since I've brought that clip back up. But, honestly, this guy completely earned every second of it. And like I mentioned earlier, >> [music] >> I'm really hoping they decide to stream his jury trial, especially after his pretrial readiness hearing didn't even make it to broadcast last week. Because if that hearing was even half as chaotic as what we've seen so far, the actual trial could turn into a full-on courtroom disaster in real time. And if that stream does go live, you already know I'll be breaking down every moment of it for you. So, if you enjoyed the video, make sure to leave a like, subscribe for more courtroom chaos, and turn on notifications so you don't miss whatever unfolds next.