Motion To Dismiss Taken Under Advisement?

On Tuesday Pete and I were, once again, in the Greenfield, MA district court to present the motion to dismiss published here last week. The court process itself when as expected with the DA trying to get our motion tossed due to a technicality and the judge refrained from viewing the video. An act that could end this whole ordeal quickly. Anyone who views the video can see all involved knew they were being recorded and that no one was harmed.

The judge seems to be sympathetic to our story and even scolded Jeffery, the DA, about returning our footage from the arrest. I’m still not sure what he’ll rule on the pending motions and I wish he would just watch the videos himself. He seems like the type of guy who does the right thing. Watch the recent court trip below and then tell us what you think. Do you think public officials have an expectation of privacy? Should recording public officials be illegal?

Don’t forget to view the Greenfield playlist on’s YouTube channel for a complete over view (or this meta post). Let’s end the War on Cameras!


Ademo Freeman

was born and raised in Wisconsin, traveled the country in a RV dubbed “MARV” and is an advocate of a voluntary society, where force is replaced with voluntary interactions. He’s partaken in projects such as, Motorhome Diaries, Liberty on Tour, Free Keene, Free Talk Live and is the Founder of

If you enjoy my work at, please, consider donating $1/month to the CopBlock Network or purchasing Gear from the store.

Find Ademo at these social networks:

  • Guy Fawkes

    I’m calling bullshit on that snake D.A.’s comment “they were only arrested for a concealed cell phone that was on”, comment. They were told to stop filming, refused, and got arrested, at least that’s what it looked like to me. Great point brought up about how if it was just the cell phone why were two people arrested.
    Is there an mp3 posted anywhere of that song you guys have in the background with the lyrics – “we’re going to pull you over just to play our banjos”?
    I would argue that not only is it a citizens right to record public officials, it should be looked on as a citizens duty to do so. Too bad there are legions of sheep that actually scorn people who risk arrest by recording police. (got that impression from reading many troll comments like “why don’t they get a job”, “stop bothering the police”, blah blah blah, asskissykissy)

  • Chip O’Whinn

    Should recording public officials be illegal? It constitutionally can’t be.

  • Larry The Dwarf

    I’m not sure you guys understand what the judge was telling you about the motion being about probable cause only based on the police report. He’s right in that whether or not you’re guilty of wiretapping is something to be argued at the trial, and not in this motion. Although, the evidence against you seems pretty weak, and I’m surprised the prosecutor hasn’t dropped the charges yet.

  • , particularly the Criminal Law Guide and article on how to get rid of a bad court-appointed lawyer.

  • It shouldn’t be illegal to record public officials. That’s just ridiculous. I really hope you make it out of this one.

  • Jon

    Interesting stuff. So if the probable cause to arrest came only from a concealed cell phone that was transmitting how did the police have probable cause to arrest you at the time. i.e. if the reasonable suspicion for arrest was a crime being committed of felony wiretap, secret transmission from the cellphone, then the arrest by definition was faulty since the police couldn’t have known of that transmission as it has to be a secret transmission to qualify. Assuming that intervening events didn’t reveal the the transmission to the police prior to their discovering the “transmitting cell phone in the pocket,” it seems the DA has now admitted that the PC for arrest was flawed.

    All of that assumes that there was at least one cell phone secretly recording/transmitting the conversation which would have to proven out during trial. Not sure of the standard given by the court here but I would assume it is something, assuming all the facts plead by the DA (e.g. those facts appearing in the office reports) support the current charges the judge is not yet trying the facts of the case as it isn’t appropriate at this point.

    Now if there wasn’t a valid arrest then there wasn’t a valid search incident to arrest, right? Fruit of the poisonous tree and all that? If the secret transmission was discovered that the arrest was flawed then was the evidence of the secretive transmission discovered in violation of the 4th amendment? Interesting questions all around.

  • John

    If this is just a motion hearing and not the trial, he’s not watching the video because he knows it could be evidence in the case he may have to rule on.

    He don’t want to bias himself.

    He most likely knows the video shows what you claim it shows so…

    He’s doing it exactly as he should. Avoid it, until the case goes to trial if it goes at all, then view the evidence at which time he can take it into account.

  • Ron

    I don’t get the DA’s logic. You had a number of cameras recording but since one was hidden you can be got for that??

    At any rate I reckon you will be heading for trial. Maybe they are just bored in that State and need the work.

  • Tristan

    financially and in a realistic sense this should have been dismissed earlier. I can’t wait to become a lawyer… I’m gonna tear this “branch” apart! Not only should this be dismissed, Pete and Ademo should put up a 4th amendment suit against the county Greenfield is in! Wiretapping is something that is summed up in the title “tapping into a wired conversation” not recording a tax funded employee to harass people in a (of all things) a “Liberty on Tour” RV… I’ve always been embarrassed to be from MA… now I feel genuine shame. I’m now embarked on a 5 year plan… once I become a “court officer” (pass the bar)… I’ll be fighting this crap!!!
    It’s too bad the State Elites have prevented smart people with a sense of ethos from become attorneys without going to school and being brainwashed in the system.

  • Ademo Freeman

    Thanks for all the comments and support everyone. I feel the same as most of you here. . . stay tuned for a conclusion in the upcoming months.

  • Rather than let the prosecutor railroad you with “facts” you don’t object to, open your mouth and say I object. Object to everything. You don’t have to know the reason. If you don’t object, then you agree with your silence. That makes it a true fact in your court case by the crazy rules of the game as far as I understand. Learn that word. Do you stand under their jurisdiction or not? In this case, perhaps I object, hearsay evidence, it is inadmissable, new evidence cannot be introduced now, whatever, same crap he is pulling about timing of your motion… I object, the prosecutor is testifying… If the prosecutor really wants to testify, I want him placed under oath and put in the witness chair… otherwise, let us stick to the facts in evidence… or something… Damn that was hard to watch. A noble attempt it may be, but it was painful as you placed your head in the vice and of course now he’s cranking the screw. Please save yourself and study the rules of civil procedure before you get yourself into court. They have many tricks and I don’t know many either. I applaud your efforts as they seem to be from a proper intent, but why stick your hand into the churning gears of the injustice machine when you can jam a wrench in there instead? Check out these archives – there’s a few on civil rights violations of title 42 section 1983, but much more on how the courts work, jurisdiction, etc Save your ass and learn from these documents freely available here if you plan on being in court again… lots to copy and adjust, but be careful, these docs may be more dangerous than your stunts because a title 42 suit can cost them tens of thousands of dollars and that pisses them off… ( so I hear, I haven’t learned how or done any, but people have and won big money – see: Bill of Rights – those are the rules!)

  • Once that guy becomes a court officer, he will do what he is told lest he be unable to pay his student loans. After that, the comfortable lifestyle will be ingrained and no action will occur by anyone on the gravy train… he will soon learn that the BAR is a British Crown club, if he doesn’t know it already…

    Brainwashing? of course.

    Financial control works even better in conjunction with brainwashing.

  • might find something useful in the case references in this MA wiretap case

    Under G.L. c. 272, §99Q aggrieved person whose oral or wire communications were intercepted,
    disclosed or used in violation of the wiretap statute may recover actual damages

    Who was damaged? Where is the damaged party?

    Check out some of Mark Stevens info for useful info (search youtube for some great stuff)
    Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui nega…
    The burden of proof is upon him who alleges, not upon him who denies.
    Patterson v Gaines (US) 6 How 550 Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, page 392.

    Make them prove you did anything secretly.
    So far all there is are the lies in the police report?

    Perhaps you need to ask them if violation your civil rights is standard procedure.
    You could instead be filing a lawsuit for a violation of your civil rights
    (unlawful arrest and kidnapping – anything they did which violates your civil right as defined in the bill of rights ).

    Under the law of Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 , I declare that I am a living flesh and blood being and NOT dead,
    and hold position of Beneficiary on any document filed into the Department of Commerce in Washington D.C.
    on my live birth for the use of credit under Public Law 1. 48 stat 1 in reference to H.R 1491.

    (7 years (old maritime law lost at sea) and you’re legally dead,
    then gov agents escheat your legal estate and appoint themselves as trustee and beneficiary
    to use your tax credits granted under the 1933 bankruptcy
    – until you tell them you are alive and claim your beneficiary position)

    The Court and the State’s Attorney are using unlawful Tax Warrants of Attorney
    as puts and calls to purchase Equity Securities and to steal this Beneficiary’s Money
    and MILLER REINSURANCE AGREEMENTS 273, 274 and 275.

    The Court and the State’s Attorney are required by U.S. PATRIOT ACT to reveal the source of their funds
    (you are the creditor by way of your estate’s account)
    by filing Currency Transaction Reports, Currency and Monetary Instrument Transportation Forms (CMIR’s)
    under §§ 5311 et seq. of 31 U.S.C. of THE BANK SECRECY ACT and 31 CFR § 103.11 regulations et seq.,
    under the U.S. PATRIOT ACT and SEC Rule 17a-8, which applies to all broker-dealers,
    incorporates the requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act to file reports and maintain records
    showing the source of the funds.

    Ok, that’s stuff you and I both don’t totally understand, and is dangerous to play with without full knowledge.

    Know for certain that the courts are private entities that sell bonds based on the court docket

    Look your court up on Duns and Bradstreet.
    search for your court and your police or the town
    They are all private for profit corporate entities. (anything and everything doing business is).

    If you learn what’s going on (and you can with Rod Class) then
    the info will cause the court to throw you out the door faster than you can blink
    and wipe any record by withdrawing the case, as they don’t want to talk about the 1933 bankruptcy,
    or the fact that there is no money, just debt or credit
    (and its yours they are playing with, but while you don’t know, they will continue).

    The Court and the State’s Attorney being educated in the Law of Commerce,
    Statute Merchant and the Laws having knowledge of

    Statute at Large Vol 48 of 1933-1934 pages 1-112 and
    Title 12 U.S.C SEC. 95 b and its reference to Public Law 91 40 stat 411 of Oct 6 1917,
    referring to H.R 4960 Trading with the Enemy Act.

    They also understand that they are under the title of Foreign Agent as listed in
    Title 22 chapter 11 sections 611 and 612 and are unregistered and unlicensed and
    are required to be registered as debt collectors to sell or otherwise Transfer any unregistered securities.

    get all the history history on it here:

  • (although this jurisdiction ship probably has sailed in this case… for next time)

    read more from Mark Stevens at

    Ask a bureaucrat if they require your permission to proceed against you.
    men and women who take control, also known as jurisdiction, over people’s lives

    If the judge says he has jurisdiction, rather than argue it, ask him where, when, and how did he acquire this so called jurisdiction over you so you can avoid it next time.

    [my opinion:

    he doesn’t have jurisdiction unless you give it (many ways: adhesion contracts like licenses, but you can argue those if you were unaware you gave up your common law rights and subjected yourself to statute UCC 1-308 – under common law no contract without meeting of the minds, UCC if you benefit without even knowing, too bad, contract made (simply by using a federal reserve note, that’s a benefit and confers jurisdiction!) ), but there are also many judge tricks to get you into his jurisdiction, sit down, speak up, spell your last name, get your hand out of your pockets, step up to the bar, stand up, etc. -basically, you must remember that you are (if you know it) the real king in the court, the sovereign, who when standing in a common law court can give orders to the judge – like I order that you withdraw the case for lack of jurisdiction , which you can set as the jurisdiction if you do it in the beginning (know that common law is of a higher position than this administrative law crap that is a psuedo maritime/admiralty Uniform Commercial Code contract law – designed solely to swindle you) Yah, I know it sounds whacked. Look up sovereign stuff. It is not all bunk, but is interspersed with disinfo designed to trip you up and put you, the property, into a warehouse, the prison, where they will further securitize bonds and make more money off you.

    Instead, you might just say you are Adam, the executive administrator for the estate of Adam Freeman, and I am here by special appearance only to inform you that you reserve your common law rights and the court has no jurisdiction as there is no contract and that I am a living breathing man who is the beneficiary of the estate of Adam Freeman. Mr. Freeman, no your honor, just Adam. He won’t like this because you are screwing with his ability to monetize on the court case (See CRIS accounts, dig deep and you will find some info

    :end of my opinion] back to Marc Stevens

    They are willing to take your property by force but not willing to discuss the facts supporting their legal opinions. What does that tell you about them?

    And what makes these bureaucrats so special or immune from questioning? If you asked your doctor about his/her qualifications, he/she would tell you about their years of study and medical school. Honest people who respect others have no problem being upfront and forthright; when asked to verify an opinion/allegation, they do it. Ask them about their qualifications and they’ll tell you.

    Bureaucrats/politicians are not honest; they only enjoy their positions because of coercion; we’re forced to support them or suffer severe punishment. I encourage everyone to challenge these allegations/opinions; demand that before you give them a dime, they prove their allegations are true. This is being a mature, responsible adult. It’s time to stop giving lip service to concepts such as freedom and liberty and start living it. We see in the news everyday the destruction to society because so many people permit governments to exist; the least we can do is to ask these bureaucrats to verify their opinions/allegations, before we give them part of our lives.

  • Freemason33

    Is this why one was charged and not the other? Family surname part of the original 13?
    Check the you_tube using this reference, as this site seems to filter such posting
    or search Atlantis- The illuminati’s Biggest Secret 2

    other good info here:
    trick: turn off style to see some pages

  • Statement to make before a “fiction court”

    “Under”- 1.) in or to a position below or beneath something. 3.) in or into a condition of subjection, subordination, or unconsciousness.

    “Standing” – n. lb: a position from which one may assert or enforce legal rights and duties.

    “Understanding” – n. 3c: a mutual agreement not formally entered into but in some degree binding on each side. “Understanding” – adj. 1: fully apprehended.

    “Apprehend” – 1a: to take hold of. 1b: arrest, seize. 3: to grasp with the understanding; be fully aware of; understand, grasp.

    “Fiction” – 1a: something invented by the imagination or feigned.

    “Feign”-la: to represent by a false appearance of. Pretense, dissemble.

    “Dissemble” 1: to hide under false appearance. 2: to put under the appearance of: simulate – vi: to put on a false appearance, conceal facts, intentions, of feelings under some pretense.

    “Statement – before a fictitious court”, “I Do Not understand as to feign or dissemble, or to be so understood as to be fully apprehended, for to do so would be under false pretense, therefore, I Do Not have understanding”

    SECOND STATEMENT (follow-up) if necessary. “I Do NOT understand, for I may be beneath a position from which YOU may assert your legal rights, and may create an agreement not formally entered into, but in some degree binding, and this may cause me to be falsely understood, fully apprehended, and dissembled, therefore, I Do NOT have understanding”

    See “Fiction of Law”


    Fiction of law. An assumption or supposition of law that something which Is or may be false Is true, or that a state of facts exists which has never really taken place. An assumption. for purposes of justice, of a fact that does not or may not exist. A rule of law which assumes as true. and will not allow to be disproved something which is false, but not impossible. Ryan v. Motor Credit Co.. 30 N.I.Eq. 531. 23 A 2d 607, 621

    In their “Fiction” Court Their “discretion” is YOU LOSE – regardless how much “Proof” or evidence of how “Right” you are.

    One man said to the court, “The Constitution says “No State shall make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”, but this court constantly Does, so this court must not be “The State”. If you are not “the State”, Who the Hell are you people?” Court said, “Case Dismissed”, “record sealed”.

    Another man, told them “I am not a “subject” of the British Crown, and the Court Rules and State Codes are “Copyrighted”, and I do Not have permission to use them, therefore the Prosecution cannot use them against me.” – “case dismissed”, “record sealed”.

    Another man was ORDERED to get an Attorney before the next HEARING
    date or he would be put in jail. The date arrived, and the Judge said, “Well do o have an attorney?” The man said “Judge, I tried, but I couldn’t find an attorney who was qualified and willing to take my case, who was not an “Esquire”. “Case Dismissed” , “Record Sealed”

    Steven Ames’ (of Harrisburg, Pensylvania) Father denied that he was a British “Subject”. The Judge said “You prove you are Not one.”

    The reason that the Court “seals the records”, seems to be that they (Judges/Lawyers) do NOT want the knowledge to get out:

    1. that the Courts-are NOT Courts of Law, but Courts of ” “Subject” Code Behavior Administration”.

    2. that the Courts are Not Courts of the State government (with separation of powers), but “private meetings” of “Lawyers” only.

    3. that all “Lawyers”, and therefore all “Judges”, are “Esquire” – a “Title of Nobility” granted by the British Crown, via InterNational Bar- Lawyer organization of London, England.

    4. that all these “Private courts” use “private copyrighted” Court Rules” and published private “Codes”, copyrighted by England.

    5. that the Lawyer-Courts ignore “State Law” and also “State Code”, if
    and when it suits their purpose – their purpose is Courts convened in
    the “interests of Justice”. (Justice = collection of “just amount” of
    “presumed debt”).

    6. that the courts’ purpose is to collect from and administer behavior of “Debtors” to the British Crown, without The People knowing that they are serfs/vassals/slaves on the British Crown’s Colony titled “United States” (fiction) and/or one of its member corporation fiction States.

    7 that all Courts are “Military Occupation” Courts of the British Crown, per Treaties.

    8. that the American People are actually “slaves of Feudalism” by the

    British Crown per Treaties, and always have been,- and under the feudal
    Law of ENGLAND through the language of modern STATUTE Law. The
    Constitution was a “Con” from the start