Can one move to strike and call it a "Sham Pleading" when the prosecutor may or may not have known but definitely SHOULD have known and COULD have known that the allegations were patently false and impertinent?

I expect a prosecutor has some kind of obligation -- at least a moral obligation -- to pay attention to details like that.

Or can it be stricken as sham because they could see on its face that various essential elements are not even being alleged?

(Yes, I'm doing the motion to dismiss for insufficiency of process AND motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action AND motion to require a more definite statement. I just want to get clear as to whether this "sham" one fits, too.)

https://www.howtowinincourt.com/FrameSet.cfm?mTitle=VideoSeminar
Avoiding the Answer (video)

*crickets* -- for 3 weeks?

In criminal cases the issue is "probable cause" and, if probable cause exists the case will go forward. The prosecutor rarely "knows" what happened but relies on a law officer's report (which should be but often is not in the form of a sworn affidavit).

You wonderful people really do need to pray we get the funding we need to teach all this to your children in our schools. Go to www.AmericanJusticeFoundation.com and donate!

B3,

Dr. Graves is correct. The term "probable cause" should be clear:

1. Someone is saying that something "probably" happened. They are not making a statement of FACT.

2. Our Legal System is founded on an Adversarial Process. So, your expecting the other side to be moral is a little naive.

3. The judge/magistrate should be a neutral party, and not take sides. So, if you 'fail to object' when your opponent make an error/cheats...then you lose.

4. A sworn Affidavit that is not rebutted stands as FACT in law. I have found in my experience that Public Servants acting under Color of Law will almost never write an affidavit to rebut yours.

Therefore, the Affidavit is always one of the first document that I submit in all of my legal proceedings. That means (in principle)if there is no one willing to rebut your affidavit...You Win!

So I state for the record in open court..."Is there anyone who rebuts by Affidavit?" If there is silence, (acquiescence) then I motion the court...
"We have agreement of the Parties, I Motion the Court to Dismiss".

People should try this tactic. I'm curious to know the results. In full disclosure, I have no real legal training beyond Dr. Graves course. I'm just expressing opinion and sharing my personal experience in these matters.

Good Luck to all! And keep studying!

B3,
Public servants do not rebut Affidavit because they cannot testify before court.
Rebuttal affidavit should be among the first document sent to other party before any appearance in court. You could also, send notice of special appearance as well. This way you can show up for court but does not admit to jurisdiction.

Continue to read Dr. Graves course. I find that if you never appear before court then one has a greater chance of escape.

Hope this help.