Educational Purpose

 The ABA is the American Bar Association, a private membership organization that advocates for the legal profession that is voluntary to join. In Ohio, the “BAR” is really the equivalent of being licensed by the state to practice law. The Ohio constitution authorizes the Ohio Supreme Court to promulgate rules that govern admission criteria. When one is “admitted” to “the BAR” it means they have met the criteria to practice law (taken the required schooling, passed the BAR exam created by the Supreme Court, etc), not that they have joined the private membership organization known as the ABA or the state or county BAR associations. There is no requirement in Ohio that once a person passes the BAR exam and is there for “admitted” to “the BAR” by becoming licensed that they then must join any of those private organizations.

Every state I know of has its own "state bar". In Florida it is regulated somewhat by the Florida Supreme Court but, like the ABA, it is NOT a governmental agency and is managed entirely by lawyers for the benefit of lawyers (though they try to convey an image of being for Justice for the People).

The ABA is an encompassing organization that (for the time being, until I have my way and see things changing) regulates what law schools teach. It too is not a governmental agency. It is a private club. One need not join to practice law. I chose not to join, because I saw early on (I didn't go to law school until I was 39 and has seen enough of the world not to be taken in as younger people are.) that the ABA has agendas that I do not approve of. They get none of my money and, in time, they will be removed from the equation as I continue to educate you and others with my work.

Please consider supporting me and my work, Elise.

Thank you Dr Graves, yes that makes a lot of sense. I didn’t finish the whole book yet (almost though) but I saw in there that you said you didn’t join them and I’m glad to see more of this clearer.


I’m also asking because since several years (!) now, I’m still dealing with these BAR attorneys in roles of Hearing Officers in administrative level (state level not court… yet!)
and you advised me a few months ago not to file complaints against the BAR attorneys who, in their roles as “judges” or Hearing officers, made up false facts in their decisions. Repeatedly.

They also adjourn but then the next time deny / lie about why they adjourned (which is in all the paperwork and audios).

I don’t know if I should file complaints but honestly I feel I should, because of exactly what you say in the book so clearly, license to steal (and these steal tax-paid salaries in state government agency jobs).


So now I learned another word these BAR attorney-Hearing Officers are using: UNCONTROVERTED EVIDENCE

I looked up a definition:

“Uncontroverted evidence refers to information or proof that is accepted as true and is not disputed by any party involved in a legal case. This type of evidence is considered reliable and can significantly impact the outcome of legal proceedings. In equity cases, if a trial court fails to acknowledge such evidence, or if the decision appears to contradict the weight of the evidence, higher courts may review the entire record. They can then issue a judgment that aligns with what the trial court should have determined, but this review only occurs under specific circumstances.”


Now when I was giving testimony I repeatedly stated that this wasn’t true, I disputed it repeatedly, and no documentation of it exists, and the other side didn’t say it did exist either. They also didn’t say it didn’t exit but it doesn’t so that’s why they didn’t prove that it existed.
But now in the Decision this BAR attorney states that it exists by “uncontroverted evidence”

Again, I “won” the decision but this part is a lie and will possibly get me in trouble so I need to bring this somewhere...
The hardest thing is, this isn’t the only untrue or made up “fact” without any proof and disputed repeatedly by me.

So it feels like they’re just throwing many lies in many places to make me fight stuff that doesn’t exist and wasn’t there to begin with in stead of fighting the simple things in this issue that’s wrong after I “won” the first time (I always win, don’t remember how many but I always “win” but I win nothing, I also can’t go to state court until I loose but I can’t loose because all the real facts and documentation proves what I say).

I keep running into the same thing, how do I prove something that never existed but these BAR attorneys in their roles as “judge” Hearing Officers solely say it does exist without proof without any if the parties saying it does.


It’s been going on for years now and to me it feels like time for probably Federal Court (1983).

I want to follow your way and get my evidence from the complaint writing short and simple sentences and building in that (possibly) everything in the complaint after Answered by them is making me win on the Pleadings.. that’s my goal from your teachings (only).
Everything I say is documented by their own agency (and they know it!)

Since I saw so many BAR attorneys in the role of Hearing Officers do this, I think there should be something added to change their policies (rules law whatever) so that this stops also for others.
But that makes it more complicated for me as well since I don’t have all the knowledge and experience etcetera.


I agree as a whole we are frogs and on the verge of being served as soup but I KNOW it’s not too late!!

BAR CORRUPTION REVEALED BY A BAR ATTORNEY … AND WHAT YOU CAN DO TO MAKE THINGS BETTER FOR US ALL.

"License to Steal" ... a full-length book FREE at https://jurisdictionary.com/courses/license-to-steal-free/

Read it. Share it with others. (This free link will be taken down in a few days, so please read it now!)

Dr. Graves has been working nearly 30 years to give you what the Bar has been hiding from you.
I could use a bit more support from ALL of you!
Enjoy my book.
Thanks!

Dr Graves, here’s another small one in Motion to Strike Sham Case, 2nd sentence The previous

In The Price of Justice, there’s “to to”
in the sentence: to to produce documents and other evidence.

Where you speak about England, by which they *governing* England from the bench..

Where you speak about Orwell and Huxley the () after that has a period .)
where there seems to not be one (or change the sentence after).

In Our Secular Priesthood
in the footnote midway, In the same cities and towns, giant corporations ARE offered (it says *and* now)


Also, check the whole document for the following
“.
and .”
Mostly it’s used outside which in American English is inside. But either way, inside or out, the book gets better if it’s used consistently.

And
In the middle of some sentences there’s accidental double spaces.


Footnotes (I like reading what you say in them, many really help me), unfortunately some don’t appear in the text.
It happened in the beginning of the book but right now I see 3 of 4 footnotes do not appear in the part Our Courts Belong to YOU!

Footnotes 4 and 5 seem to be missing in The Rules are Simple

Footnotes 5 and 6 are missing in the The In-Justice of Plea Deals

Footnote 7 is missing in The Selfishness of Trial Lawyers

My courses are designed to help people win in court.
My book is designed to show people that we must work together to TAKE THE COURTS AWAY FROM THE BAR.

Imagine going to law school and thinking you have a license to steal and are superior to any pro se. Then one day AI emerges en masse, which enables pro se litigants to produce better work than you ever will unless you use AI yourself. It's called karma. Still judicial bias is real.

@I5HandsTough the BAR is too far gone at this point, short of pitch forks and torches and the people dragging these scum bags through the streets, there will be no judicial reform as the BAR not only controls the judicial branch, they control the other 2 branches also!

BUT, Randy is spot on and is the only one pursuing a viable option to level the playing field, CLEANING UP THE GRAND JURY PROCESS, which also at present has been usurped by the BAR! Every County DA acts as barrier between the people and the Grand Jury. It's not the DA's job to be deciding what cases the Grand jury persecutes! As it is now the DA is nothing more than a gate keeper! Give the people open access to the grand jury and let the grand jury, uncolored by the DA's influence, decide which cases they want to hand down True Bills for!