Sovereign Citizen “Hillbilly” Has No Idea How to Represent Himself — But Refuses to Back Down!

追加: 2026-05-07

[00:00:00]Hey guys, welcome to today's video.

[00:00:02]We've got another sovereign citizen case where a man tries to use the usual scripted arguments in court. In this one, we're looking at two of his pre-trial hearings as he heads toward a couple of upcoming jury trials. And apparently, there's also talk of a brother or uncle involved in a separate case in another jurisdiction, but we'll save that for a future video. Before we get into it, just a heads up. This one gets pretty frustrating to watch, so you might want to brace yourself. All right, let's jump in.

[00:00:31]>> Sullivan 20 5 M42624 M439 and good uh morning. Can you tell me your name, please?

[00:00:44]>> Um Jared Mark of the family Sullivan.

[00:00:46]>> Uh people, what is your the outcome of your conversation, Mr. Sullivan?

[00:00:51]>> Your honor, Mr. Sullivan indicated to me that these are likely going to become trial cases. I do have a note in the file that Mr. Sullivan filed a discovery demand but has not yet come to our office or requested that discovery in any way. So I did inform him that he can go upstairs to our office and request that discovery. I also offered to provide the Lur County website where you can make a discovery request, but he did not want that website written down for him. So, I've instructed him up to the second floor to request that discovery after this court date.

[00:01:23]>> Okay. Uh, Mr. Sullivan, what are you asking the court to do today?

[00:01:30]>> Um, well, I'd push for another u dismissal based on failure to state a claim.

[00:01:39]>> Mr. Uh the the your your your motion to dismiss has been is settled and we will no longer be I will no longer be considering any more motions based on the grounds you previously asserted.

[00:01:53]Well, then your response to that is just adding uh claims onto the record that haven't been brought up by either parties and it leaves the appearance that uh you're acting outside of the bounds of your duties as an independent third party. We are you are asking me to review motions uh and issues that I reviewed I think last year and already acted on. I'm not doing that again.

[00:02:26]Do you have an oath to the Constitution on record, sir?

[00:02:29]>> Thank you. Pardon?

[00:02:30]>> Do you have an oath to the Constitution on record?

[00:02:32]>> Sovereign citizens often seem to believe that refusing to consent, challenging jurisdiction and asking questions like, "Do you have an oath to the Constitution?" somehow works like a magic formula to get them out of legal trouble. But as interesting as that idea might sound to them, it simply doesn't work that way in court.

[00:02:49]>> We've discussed this and so we're going to move on. You are choosing do you have a choose do you have an oath of office on record to the constitution sir?

[00:02:58]>> Sir you may not interrupt me.

[00:03:01]>> Uh are I'm going to go through you you are choosing to represent yourself. Is that correct?

[00:03:08]>> Y >> then I have to ask you some questions.

[00:03:11]Um and I think I've asked you this before but we'll go over it again. Are you currently under the influence of any drugs, medication or alcohol that would affect your understanding of these proceedings?

[00:03:20]>> No. Do you understand that you have the right to be represented by an attorney throughout these proceedings?

[00:03:26]>> Yes.

[00:03:27]>> Do you understand that if you cannot afford an attorney that an attorney can be provided to you at no charge to you if you qualify financially for that service?

[00:03:36]>> Uh yeah, we've already done that.

[00:03:37]>> I know. But but do you understand that?

[00:03:41]>> Yeah.

[00:03:42]Uh, and do you understand that I would appoint council to represent you if you wanted an attorney to represent you provided you meet that financial eligibility requirement? Do you understand that?

[00:03:54]>> Yes.

[00:03:55]>> Do you have any legal training?

[00:03:57]>> No.

[00:03:58]>> How far have you got in school?

[00:04:00]>> Some college.

[00:04:02]>> Uh, do you understand that the criminal law is a complicated area and that an attorney trained in this field could be of great help in preparing and presenting and and representing your defense?

[00:04:11]Uh, no. I don't understand that because I haven't seen evidence of it.

[00:04:17]>> Just what?

[00:04:18]>> I haven't seen evidence of that, especially through the uh attorney that I was provided that offered an effective assistance of counsel.

[00:04:26]>> Well, all I'm asking is do you understand that the criminal I'm not asking you to uh about the specifics of the case generally? Do you understand that criminal law is a complicated area and that an attorney trained in this field could be of great help in pres in preparing and presenting your defense?

[00:04:42]>> In theory, yes.

[00:04:44]>> Uh, do you understand that you will be held to the same rules and laws as an attorney would even though you do not have the same training and qualifications of an attorney?

[00:04:51]>> No.

[00:04:52]>> You don't understand that?

[00:04:54]>> I will explain it. You will be held to the same rules and laws as an attorney even though you don't have the same training and qualifications. For example, uh the district attorney just discussed discovery. An attorney uh who is trained and qualified uh knows that they have to make a request to the district attorney uh to disclose the discovery. The district attorney doesn't just automatically provide it. Once they get that request, they will provide what they're required to provide under rule 16 of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure. Uh the district attorney has said that you have not made that request yet. So, that would be an example. Uh, so if you came back at trial and told me they never gave you discovery, um, then I would hold you to the same rules and laws as an attorney would be held to, which is that if you didn't request it, then that's on you, not them. [snorts] So, that's an example of you being held to the same rules and laws as an attorney would, even though you do not have the same training and qualifications as an attorney. So, do you understand that? I don't because my attorney the ineffective assistance of counsel that was provided by the court had already requested that uh discovery and and I keep filing more the same discovery request because they refused to release it exculpatory evidence.

[00:06:19]>> So I'm not again asking you I just used an example from your case to illustrate the general the general idea. The general idea is, do you understand you will be held to the same rules and laws as an attorney would, even though you do not have the same training and qualifications as an attorney?

[00:06:41]>> Keep what he just said in mind because the judge has already warned him that even though he's representing himself, he'll be held to the same standards as an attorney. He's going to bring up complaints about being at a disadvantage later in today's video, and that context will matter when we get there.

[00:06:57]>> Court will find that decision is knowingly and voluntarily made. So, in 25M426, what is your plea uh to obstructing a peace officer guilty or well, actually, I should probably have the people recite the last offer communicated uh to Mr. Sullivan on one or both of these cases if it's a global offer.

[00:07:18]>> Yes, your honor. In 24M439, the last offer was to plead to original count one, no proof of insurance with a $500 fine and four points against the DMV. In 25M426, the last offer was to plead guilty to original count one obstructing with 6 months of unsupervised probation and is discovering better choices class within 5 months, 16 hours of UPS within 5 months, and to remain law- abiding. Both of those offers are now revoked. Well, we'll get there in a minute. Um, so in 24 M439, if the plea of guilty to is to count one, does that uh am I correct in inferring the offer contemplates dismissal of the remaining counts?

[00:08:01]>> Yes, your honor. I apologize.

[00:08:03]>> Uh, Mr. Sullivan, did you hear what the district attorney just communicated?

[00:08:10]>> Yes. If you enter a plea of not guilty, all of the uh you will be communicating to the district attorney you would not accept that offer. You'd be communicating and the district attorney is free to withdraw it. Um and if they choose to withdraw it, they may choose not to put any new proposals on the table for a resolution of either case, which may leave the trial that I set as a result of your not guilty plea as being the only way to resolve the cases.

[00:08:38]Do you have any questions about that?

[00:08:40]Uh, no.

[00:08:41]>> So, in 25mm426, what is your plea? Guilty or not guilty?

[00:08:48]>> Uh, I do not consent to enter any plea on my behalf. I do not comprehend or understand how to inter plea as there is no injured party in this matter and no evidence of any contractual obligation requiring performance to follow the corporate state of Colorado statutes, codes, ordinances and rules that are merely merely policies of the corporation acting as government under the color of law outside the bounds of the Constitutions of the United States and the state of Colorado.

[00:09:14]>> Right. So, it sounds like you're refusing to enter a plea. Is that correct?

[00:09:17]>> Yes, sir. and the court will uh enter a not-uilty plea on your behalf. Uh on 24 M439 to count one, driving without insurance uh obstructing a count two obstructing a peace officer. Count three, driver's license refusal to display. Count four, fictitious plate. What are your p guilty or not guilty?

[00:09:38]>> I do not consent to enter any plea on my behalf. I do not comprehend or understand how to enter a plea as there is no injured party in this matter and no evidence of any contractual obligation requiring performance to follow the corporate state of Colorado statutes, codes, ordinances, and rules that are merely policies of the corporation acting as government under the color of law outside the bounds of the Constitution of the United States and Colorado state.

[00:10:04]>> So it's am I also correct in inferring you are refusing to enter a plea in 24 M439 as well? Yes, sir.

[00:10:11]>> Court will uh enter a not-uilty plea on Mr. Sullivan's behalf. Are your requests uh are you requesting a trial to the court or a trial to the to a jury on these two cases?

[00:10:24]>> I'm demanding a trial by jury.

[00:10:27]>> All right.

[00:10:28]>> And are [clears throat] you planning on scheduling those backtoback judge? Is that my understanding?

[00:10:33]>> Beg pardon?

[00:10:34]>> Are these uh trials scheduled back to back?

[00:10:38]>> Right. So, if one go, one will go and the other one will get continued.

[00:10:43]>> All right, that wraps up his initial appearance. He obviously didn't enter a plea, which means his speedy trial clock hasn't even started running yet. Now, we're moving on to his next court appearance, and this is where his lack of understanding really starts to take center stage. And >> Mr. Sullivan, are you ready to proceed to trial?

[00:11:03]Uh, >> no, I don't believe so. Well, maybe, maybe on the 439 case.

[00:11:09]Um, >> yes, I know that yes or no answer >> to know how to proceed next.

[00:11:15]>> Well, I was prepared. I didn't know we were splitting them back up.

[00:11:19]>> Pardon?

[00:11:19]>> I didn't know that we were splitting them back up.

[00:11:23]>> Why we're splitting them back up?

[00:11:25]>> Well, if Yeah, they're they're scheduled for the same day for this trial next week, >> right? They wouldn't both go to trial at the same time. They would one or the other would go.

[00:11:36]>> Okay. Well, then yeah, I can do 439.

[00:11:40]>> All right.

[00:11:40]>> Uh, in that 426, I'm still waiting for discovery and disclosure of witness names.

[00:11:50]>> Um, then >> I will note that the deadline for resolution is February 23rd at 12:30 p.m.

[00:12:01]>> Will you be requesting the new reasonable doubt instruction?

[00:12:05]>> Yes, sir.

[00:12:07]The new reasonable doubt instruction reads as follows.

[00:12:12]Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt. If you are firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt, then the prosecution has proven the crime charge beyond a reasonable doubt. But if you think there's a real possibility that the defendant is not guilty, then the prosecution has failed to prove the crime charge beyond a reasonable doubt.

[00:12:31]And a reasonable doubt can be based on the evidence presented or the lack of evidence presented. New reasonable doubt. Are you going to have an objection to me reading that uh reasonable doubt instruction to the jury?

[00:12:44]>> Pardon me?

[00:12:46]>> Yes, >> I'm fine with that. That sounds fair enough.

[00:12:50]>> People, how long are you asking for vorire?

[00:12:52]>> It's 10 minutes, your honor.

[00:12:54]>> Mr. Sullivan, how long are you asking for vorire?

[00:12:57]>> For what? Warire. I don't know what that is.

[00:13:02]>> Vardier comes from old French and literally means to speak the truth. In modern terms, it's the process where the judge and attorneys question potential jurors under oath to uncover any biases or issues that might affect their judgment. Even though we call it jury selection, it's really more of a deselection process. It's used to identify and remove anyone who may not be able to stay impartial before the trial actually begins.

[00:13:27]>> What's done?

[00:13:28]>> It's the process where you ask the jury questions to find out ahead of the jury being selected whether or not the people who are called uh to serve as jurors can be fair and impartial.

[00:13:41]>> Is that between individuals or in >> Mr. uh Sullivan? You may recall when I I gave you an advisement that said that if you're choosing to represent yourself, you need to understand that you will be held to the same rules and laws as an attorney would, even though you don't have the same training and experience as an attorney.

[00:14:04]So, I I'm not planning I'm I'm really not able to coach you through this process. I'm expecting you to come to court already having this knowledge of what it what what will be happening at a jury trial.

[00:14:17]>> Well, yeah. All I can do is guess at this point.

[00:14:21]>> Let me put it this way. We will not slow the trial moving forward because you are not knowing or understanding things you should know or understand ahead of time.

[00:14:37]For example, vorire will be 15 minutes in length. Regardless of how long once you have figured out what vorire is, how long you want to use on vory, it'll be 15 minutes in length. How long are the people requesting for opening statements?

[00:14:54]>> Five minutes. Your >> Mr. Sullivan, is 5 minutes going to be long enough for you to make your opening statement?

[00:15:00]Uh, >> maybe go 10.

[00:15:03]Uh the court will uh allow five minutes for opening statement because what needs to be what is stated during opening statement is a recitation of facts. It's not argument or commentary on the law. Um and and five minutes should be adequate um to to cover that people. Uh, how long are you asking for closing?

[00:15:34]>> 10 minutes or more.

[00:15:36]>> And sir, how long do you think you need to close?

[00:15:40]>> I imagine that'll work.

[00:15:42]>> Pardon?

[00:15:43]>> I imag Well, clearly you're just going to say 10 minutes. So, I'm going to say 20 minutes because I'd rather have extra time whether I need it or not.

[00:15:53]>> Well, I will allow 15 cut short.

[00:15:55]>> I will allow 15 minutes for closing because there are four counts. Those counts do not all rely on the same evidence. So, there may need to be a little bit more argument regarding how the facts fit or don't fit with those elements. Will any witnesses need a special accommodations people?

[00:16:15]>> No.

[00:16:15]>> Are you planning on using the courtroom technology?

[00:16:18]>> Yes, your honor.

[00:16:19]>> Mr. Sullivan, were you planning on using your computer to publish exhibits to the jury?

[00:16:29]To my knowledge, that's the only way to do it is if I bring my own equipment.

[00:16:32]>> I don't understand what you're saying.

[00:16:34]>> To my knowledge, that's the only way to do it is if I bring my own equipment, right?

[00:16:39]>> Well, no, you can have paper copies and share them with the jury um by having them look at paper. Uh the reason why I'm asking if you're planning on publishing with a computer then you will be using uh the the courtroom technology to accomplish that.

[00:17:01]And and again it's a situation where you need to be ready to have that going cuz I'm not going to wait to troubleshoot issues. We won't be troubleshooting issues in front of the jury.

[00:17:15]>> Okay. I can't help with phrasing that targets someone's mental state or intelligence in a degrading way. If you want, I can rewrite it in a sharper but more neutral commentary style tone that still fits your video vibe without going into insults.

[00:17:28]>> I don't know if I can ask about exhibits conferring on exhibits because I don't have an exhibit list. [snorts] >> I haven't been provided any either.

[00:17:36]>> Right here. Um, as I said, I will um immediately after leaving here, I will um provide that and also get some good contact information for Mr. Sullivan so he and I can confer uh so we can make sure that there are no issues going into the the trial.

[00:17:50]>> All right. Do you have exhibits that you intend to admit?

[00:17:54]>> Just body one camera, your honor.

[00:17:55]>> I'm sorry. I'm speaking to Mr. uh Sullivan.

[00:17:58]>> Oh, yeah. I've got an exist in >> right. But uh the question is more directed.

[00:18:13]Well, you answered my question, so I'm going to ask the next question, which is, do you know how to admit exhibits?

[00:18:22]>> Uh, probably not. As far as getting them to the clerk or >> No, getting them in front of a jury.

[00:18:30]>> Oh, no.

[00:18:30]>> Asking me uh whether or not I will allow the exhibits you have to be in front of a jury to to to see to to allow the jury to see and consider the exhibits as evidence.

[00:18:43]No, I don't.

[00:18:44]>> Okay. Again, that's something you are expected to have ready. Uh you are expected to have um you are expected to be ready to do. And so what I'm not going to do is coach you through the process. And what I'm not going to do is uh wait uh for you to figure out how to admit it in real time.

[00:19:08]I'm telling you this now so that you are not surprised. when we get to the trial.

[00:19:14]I don't know if there's anything else I need to take up. This trial is second in priority. So, uh, if Mr. Bangs is ready to proceed to trial, this trial will be continued. If the if Mr. Bangs is not ready for trial for any reason, then this trial will proceed.

[00:19:30]>> So, it looks like we're going to get a full-blown jury trial featuring Numpty McNumn Nuts. But that's not the end of it because he actually has a second jury trial coming up as well. With regard to 25M426, I granted the people's request to add count two, speeding 20 to 44 miles over posted speed limit, class A traffic infraction. Count three, failure to provide proof of insurance, a class one uh traffic misdemeanor, and count four, displaying fictitious or altered license planner.

[00:20:07]uh all also alleged to have occurred on April 7th, 2025.

[00:20:12]Uh are are are your what is your plea to those three new newish counts? Uh guilty or not guilty?

[00:20:21]>> I don't consent to any plea. I was never uh served with any of the documentation for that motion.

[00:20:29]So the court would um first note that it's uh your responsibility sir to make sure that we have current contact information. So the information that um uh that that when we when we take an action on this case, you're notified about it.

[00:20:50]>> Are you insinuating that my contact information has changed?

[00:20:54]>> I granted this motion on um November 12th. Did you receive a copy of my order?

[00:21:00]>> Yeah, I did. And I objected to it. And >> then um the And did you get a copy of the motion before ahead ahead of my um order granting it?

[00:21:17]>> No, I just got the the order granting it. I didn't receive anything.

[00:21:22]>> So, does the do the people have current contact information for you?

[00:21:27]It hasn't changed.

[00:21:30]>> What?

[00:21:30]>> It hasn't. My contact information hasn't changed. My My mail continues to go to the same address. That is the only thing that I have noted.

[00:21:38]>> Well, then maybe you should go ahead and let the Waffle House employees know that if any mail arrives addressed to the Sullivan family, it should be forwarded straight to the grease trap behind the restaurant instead. So people, you have, it appears you have the correct email address, and I don't know if you've been emailing copies of what you've been filing, but you are not sending information to the correct mail address.

[00:22:03]You have it as Fort Collins. It's not Fort Collins. It's Lovelin.

[00:22:07]Understood, your honor. I'll make sure that we update that in our system. Um I I do believe though that through e- filing, he should be getting automatic mail notifications.

[00:22:17]um should he not be getting um mail notifications through e- filing?

[00:22:22]>> No. Okay. I'll just double check to make sure that we have the correct address on file so we can ensure that that is getting sent to him. Also make sure that I um just email him copies of everything that's been filed in the case thus far.

[00:22:32]And as I stated earlier, I'll get in touch um I'll speak with Mr. Sullivan right now to get some updated contact information so we can confer about um everything regarding both these cases.

[00:22:42]>> Court enters uh a not guilty plea on Mr. Sullivan's behalf. Um and on counts 2 through 4 and 25 M426 25M 426 the request to continue is granted.

[00:22:58]Anything else we would need to take up for Mr. Sullivan?

[00:23:03]>> Um just to ensure that we focus on the actual law as it stands and not some of the superfluous materials which have come up throughout the case. I intend to keep a tight lid on um this case may be about and what it may not be about which um Mr. Solo and I think the best uh information you should take away from that answer is if I make a decision uh about an argument or a piece of evidence that you disagree with, you are free to object. You are not free to argue with me about it. Um, if I uh sustain an objection to a piece of evidence or an argument that you make, you may not try again to get the same piece of evidence or argument in front of the jury. I shouldn't have to sustain an objection more than once to a particular piece of evidence or a particular argument. Um, I'm expecting full cooperation with that. And if you believe I'm mistaken, you are free to object. And if I overrule your objection, your remedy is not to either keep arguing with me about it or to keep making the same objection over and over again. It is to wait to see the outcome of the trial. And if the outcome of the trial is a conviction, then you may appeal any error that you think I might have made. Do you have any questions about that?

[00:24:46]>> No. I I've made it clear that I don't feel like there is a fair trial involved. So, I'm just here for the rigomearo. So, we can get to that.

[00:24:55]>> Well, maybe you should try rolling around in some lead paint in hopes of a full brain reset because that's probably the only thing that might help at this point. Anyway, that's the end of the video. I've got several jury trials coming up for you guys, including two involving Jared from the family. Most of them are sovereign citizen cases, and tomorrow's video is a 6-hour jury trial that I've condensed down to about an hour of pure chaos and entertainment.

[00:25:21]So, make sure you tune in tomorrow because you really don't want to miss it. If you enjoyed the video, hit the like button. If you didn't, hit dislike and don't forget to leave a comment below and subscribe with notifications turned on so you don't miss any of the upcoming content.