Link to the New Merch Store is :https://my-store-d9ec76.creator-spring.com
Get your “We Don’t Stop” T-shirt and your Indestructible Tri-Fold on DeletelawZ dot com — We Dont Stop —
THE TRANSPARENCY APP IS COMING VERY SOON!!
You should always use THE TRIFOLD That we sell on INDESTRUCTIBLE PAPER from the website DeleteLawZ dot com for $25.00. We ship it from Los Angeles. OR — get the Trifold you PRINT AT HOME for five dollars
DeleteLawZ dot com
Thanks,
Chille
@Chille-DeCastro PayPal
@Chille-DeCastro Venmo
$ChilleDeCastro Cashapp
Amazon Wishlist: https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/2OZO37IQE83BT/ref=nav_wishlist_lists_2
source
What would they do if millions of Americans all the sudden protest this???? 🤔 That's what needs to happen. I don't care how many years experience a policeman has. No right to just go up and grab a person because they don't like how I look. Can't We The People start a petition to overturn this? JESUS HELP US!!!!!!
I will again point out, that Terry v Ohio doesn't say what this man says it says. And, again point out he's mixing and matching Supreme Court decisions. Pennsylvania v Mimms has the exception statute he keeps claiming is in Terry v Ohio. It's the dissenting opinion in an 8-1 decision. I would think a constitutional law scholar would know this, and he would also know how many justices were in the majority. And, he would know which case was which. Cops can't just search you because they don't like how you look. However, let's try this scenario of why a cop would search someone.
It's the middle of July and 80 degrees. A police officer observes someone wearing a heavy jacket with an obvious bulge in it. He stops the person, and begins asking questions. The person is evasive and giving obviously strange answers. The officer then pats him down and finds a gun. Come to find out later, this person is a convicted felon, and has a warrant out for their arrest.
Was the officer wrong? No. Because, convicted felons don't have the right to have guns. That's a crime. Also, there's a warrant. Another crime. This is why delete lawz is not going to get this to happen. If he truly believed he had a case, then he would file a lawsuit in federal court, within his jurisdiction, which would be the 9th circuit and see what happens.
I'm not the biggest fan of that court, but they won't overturn a Supreme Court decision. Then, you appeal to the Supreme Court, and see what happens. I'm guessing they will refuse to hear the case, or this guy will lose. This is the process for overturning cases. Not YouTube videos.
Seriously, constitutional law scholar don't you know this already?
Love your channel. Love your passion. I can't believe this is the first time I have seen your work. I am independent and strongly believe that reform is absolutely needed. Thank you for creating a time line – that really is alarming to see the cycles.
Hugo Black still burning in hell at least we can all hope.
You hit it right on the nose….Jim Crow Cop
Absolutely needs to be overturned!!!
AND qualified immediately!
This video is massively under-viewed!
You have my suport.
Overturning Terry versus Ohio I know begins with people knowing what it is. What is the next step, how can you overturn an almost 60-year Supreme Court Law case that will affect dozens of other Supreme Court cases. I know this was just given to law enforcement by the Supreme Court, but how do we take it back? Would we have to write a new bill or new law? Anyone?
Most important film of our time.
I thought stop and frisk was not okay.
Now I'm thoroughly confused and don't know what our rights are.
RAS
Good job. Thank you. !!
Yessss….!!
CHILLE I HAVE PASSED TERRY VS OHIO TO ALL MY FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS I ALSO POSTED IT ON MY FACEBOOK IF EVERYONE SHARES THIS AND TALK ABOUT THIS WE THE PEOPLE CAN YOU TURN TERRY VS OHIO WE CAN FIX THIS BROKEN SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE TODAY THANK YOU CHILLE FOR PUTTING THIS OUT IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE CAN ALL UNDERSTAND IT AND PLEASE SHARE THIS ALL OF US TAKE A PART OF THIS THIS WILL HELP OUR GRANDKIDS AND FUTURE
GENERATIONS
Before Terry, there were more people that had a respect for police and now because there are NO REASONABLE police nowadays, this is why citizens get killed while holding a camera.
Thumbs up to all your videos! 👍
Man Chillie, these videos are freeking so informative. I save theses videos and rewatch them. Thank you so much man.
Never gonna happen. You should go back to constitutional law schoool😂🤣😂🤣
Oh man i love how you’ve done your homework and dedicated your life to this fight right now. We all need to be on board! Thanks for the lead brother much appreciated.
This has been done before and was corrected, and in the "correction" all case law was tossed as it never should have gone to court in the first place…..we are here again.
The common law does NOT allow police to knock and enter.
Upon what do you base this statement?
Common law that includes its own rules and principles and can be said to be:
Do not cause a harm; injury; or loss and do not trespass without due-process-of-law; where "due-process-of-law" means a public court-of-record that proceeds according to the rules and principles of the common law.
Where "due-process-of-law" is NOT synonymous with "due-process" which should be obvious as "due-process" contains NO "law".
"Due-process" which; "in practice" is a private and foreign courts-not-of-record "process" of the private and foreign law society members; who ARE Roman citizens (this is what it means to be "called to the bar").
rule-of-law has NOTHING to do with statutes that are "rule-by-man".
Previous case law is "relevant" due to the "rule-of-law" principle that law is required to be "known" and "consistent"; and case law demonstrates that the party in the seat of the judge will violate the fundamental law principle of "consistency" if he ruled in opposition to the cases you have cited; thus, it would be an "error of law" and "reviewable, and possibly disciplinary for the judge (by whatever called).
This is due to the lawless and Godless monopoly on the courts created by the alleged "assuming" of the powerful public common law courts-of-record jurisdiction; powers; and authority by the private state-and-church-party-ACTING-as-governments (Clearfield Doctrine, 1943); since the "coup" (abnormal states-of-law: war and emergency) begun in WW1 all over the world.
So, all the lawlessness and Godlessness is because of the "lawless abnormal state-of-law since WW1"; the coup that has NEVER ended, meaning; at least 5 generations have NEVER witnessed; and NEVER experienced "a normal state-of-law".
This is because of the lawless monopoly of the courts.
A public court-of-record that proceeds according to the rules and principles of the common law: ARE OUR courts; the peoples courts not trained at law; where no lawyer is permitted to speak unless under oath as a witness giving firsthand knowledge testimony because he is a foreigner, this is NOT his court (or their society; church; or state court); and this is NOT his "law"; the "common law" is "foreign law" to all law society members and this is why they argue "inherent-jurisdiction"; where; as always; all adjectives colour the law; and therefore; due to a conflict of interest (lawyers playing rolls of defence and prosecutor and the "judge") all being members of the private and foreign society have to rightly recuse themselves as they loose jurisdiction for having or having had an interest in the case.
As the ONLY court where there is "equality and equal protection of the law" is AT public courts-of-record that proceed according to the rules and principles of the common law…..we need; require; demand; these courts and access to them free from ALL state; church; law society interference or involvement.
The public court-of-record are usually the county courts (may be a city if the entire county is the city) as the county is "land" and these courts proceed by the "law-of-the-land"; the common law; the public law of every common law jurisdiction and governance.
Where there is NO "civil code"; it is a common law governance and jurisdiction.
Where there is no "civil code" there can be NO lawful enforcement of any "civil law": rule-by-man.
Quebec Canada has a civil code; the rest of Canada does NOT; because like the U.S. of A. it is a common law governance and jurisdiction; at least was prior to the lawless WW1 coup for the enforcement of an abnormal state-of-law (war and emergency); or should have been since 1843.
This explains all the stupid and impossible declarations of war on :
inanimate objects (drugs; guns) and
states of being (poverty; child-poverty; homelessness) by politicians to perpetuate the lawless grab for power they never had any right to, to continue to exercise control and powers lawlessly by alleging states of "war and emergency".
This has been done before, 1600's; resulting in civil war; a kings execution; the Glorious Revaluation 1688; and the "lawfully-enabled" Bill of Rights, 1689.
Out of all the people who do videos like these, this guy is by far the most educated or knowledgeable. There is no cop that could win in a debate.
The thread was deleted for free speech.
However
I wish you would have answered the question first. .
"Why do they put uphold and defend the constitution in the oath of every American that takes it? If they don't intend on everyone that takes the oath having the responsibility of upholding the constitution as the law of the land and defending the rights protected within that constitution from unconstitutional laws or infringements. From foreign or domestic enemy's"
seems to me it was layed out quit clearly as one of the checks and balances of our constitutional republic. To ensure tyrannical rules are not put in place.
CHILLE FOR GOVERNOR
What a clown
Stupid judges to allow this