YesToHellWith cover art

YesToHellWith

YesToHellWith

By: and may TRUTH reign supreme!
Listen for free

Summary

 YesToHellWith is determined to expose the wrongful conviction and imprisonment of Orlando Carter. We are asking that President Trump review this injustice and exonerate Carter.

yestohellwith.substack.comyestohellwith Political Science Politics & Government
Episodes
  • What to Do in Court.

    What to Do in Court.
    May 7 2026
    This video is for May 7, 2026. Welcome to yestohellwith.com.Today, we are going to discuss something that most people never think about until they are standing in a courtroom under pressure.How do you slow the process down when the judge is moving too quickly?Now understand this carefully.The courtroom operates on momentum.Cases are called rapidly.People are expected to respond immediately.The judge controls the pace.And most defendants become overwhelmed before they ever regain their composure.This is especially true for pro per defendants.Because the environment itself creates pressure:the judge,the prosecutor,the deputies,the procedure,and the courtroom itself.And under pressure—people panic.They begin reacting emotionally.They begin agreeing to things they do not fully understand.And they begin losing control of themselves.So today we are going to discuss some realistic ways to slow the process down without becoming combative or disrespectful.Now understand—the goal is not to “beat the judge.”The goal is not endless argument.And the goal is certainly not hostility toward the court.The goal is to create enough space for clarity.That is the purpose.One of the first things a pro per defendant should understand is that courts recognize, at least in principle, that a self-represented litigant does not possess the training of an attorney.This is why cases such as Haines v. Kerner are often referenced.Not because they magically solve problems—but because they acknowledge a basic reality:a pro per defendant lacks formal legal training.And once that reality is acknowledged,the pace should change.The court should understand that the defendant may require clarification, patience, or reasonable procedural latitude in order to participate meaningfully.Now this does not mean the judge becomes your advocate.And it does not mean the court gives legal advice.But it does mean fairness requires restraint and patience.So one practical approach is to calmly remind the court of your pro per status early in the proceeding.For example:“Your Honor, I respectfully ask the Court to recognize that I am appearing pro per and do not possess the training or experience of licensed counsel. I ask for reasonable procedural latitude so that I may meaningfully participate and preserve my rights.”Notice the tone.Calm.Measured.Respectful.No hostility.No accusation.Now another practical way to slow the process is ensuring that the record is preserved.Because once everyone understands the record matters,the pace often becomes more deliberate.The judge knows the record matters.The prosecutor knows the record matters.This is not manipulation.This is accountability.Now there are also situations where the judge becomes impatient or aggressive.And when that happens,most people emotionally collapse.They either become submissive,or combative.Both are mistakes.Instead,the proper response is calm restraint.For example:“Your Honor, I am attempting to proceed respectfully and carefully. I ask for patience so that I may properly understand and respond.”Or:“Your Honor, I do not intend disrespect. I am attempting to preserve clarity and avoid misunderstanding.”Notice again—the goal is not confrontation.The goal is to reduce pressure while preserving composure.Now another important point involves judicial ethics and courtroom conduct.A calm reference to fairness and meaningful participation can sometimes encourage the court to moderate its tone without direct accusation.For example:“Your Honor, I am attempting to participate meaningfully and respectfully in the proceeding, and I ask the Court’s patience as I do so.”That statement subtly invokes fairness without openly attacking the judge.And psychologically,that matters.Because many judges do not want the appearance of hostility toward a self-represented defendant preserved on the record.Now understand this carefully.None of these approaches are magical.None guarantee outcomes.And none place you in control of the courtroom.The judge still controls the courtroom.But what these approaches can do is:slow momentum,reduce pressure,preserve clarity,and help you maintain composure.And that matters far more than most people realize.Because once a person psychologically collapses in court,the rest of the proceeding usually becomes reaction.The Liberty Dialogues is not about magical phrases or courtroom theatrics.It is about structure.Discipline.Clarity.And maintaining composure under pressure.That is the lesson.And as always—May truth reign supreme. Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Show More Show Less
    7 mins
  • How to Handle Yourself in Court

    How to Handle Yourself in Court
    May 6 2026
    It is May 6, 2026. Welcome to yestohellwith.com.Up to this point, we have discussed the structure of prosecution and why most Americans lose before they ever understand the process they are entering.The courtroom itself creates pressure.The judge.The prosecutor.The formality.The process.Most people walk in intimidated and begin reacting emotionally rather than responding deliberately.Now understand this clearly.What you are about to hear is not fantasy.This is not internet theater.And this is not how people speak in movies.Real court moves quickly.You will not have ten uninterrupted minutes to explain yourself.You may only have seconds.Seconds to respond.Seconds to preserve your composure.Seconds to avoid conceding something you do not fully understand.So the purpose of this example is not to teach argument.It is to demonstrate structure, restraint, and composure under pressure.Pay attention not merely to the words—But to the posture.Because that distinction changes everything.(Courtroom Scene Begins)(Defendant stands calmly after the case is called.)Judge: State your name for the record.Defendant: Good morning, Your Honor. My name is [Name], and I am present and prepared to proceed.Judge: Are you represented by counsel today?Defendant: No, Your Honor. I am appearing pro per.Judge: Very well. You’ve been charged with [charge]. How do you plead?Defendant: Your Honor, before entering a plea, I would respectfully request clarification regarding the basis of the charge so that I can respond appropriately and accurately.Judge: Sir, this is a simple question. You need to enter a plea.Defendant: I understand, Your Honor. I am not refusing to proceed. I am attempting to ensure that my response is informed rather than presumptive. Could the Court identify the authority underlying the charge being asserted in this matter?Judge: The authority is the law of this state. You are charged under the applicable statute.Defendant: Respectfully, Your Honor, I understand that a statute is being referenced. I am attempting to understand the specific basis upon which the proceeding is moving forward so that I may respond accurately within that framework.Judge: Sir, the Court is not going to debate legal theory with you this morning.Defendant: Understood, Your Honor. I am not attempting to debate. I am attempting to clarify.I would respectfully ask whether the Court is asserting jurisdiction in this matter and how that jurisdiction has been established in this specific case.Judge: This Court has jurisdiction over criminal matters occurring within this county.Defendant: Thank you, Your Honor.Additionally, I would respectfully ask how I am being classified within this proceeding and under what legal definition that classification arises.Judge: You are the defendant in a criminal case.Defendant: Understood, Your Honor.I would also respectfully ask who the claimant is in this matter and what specific injury or violation is being alleged.Judge: The Commonwealth is the prosecuting authority. The alleged violation is contained in the charging instrument.Defendant: Thank you, Your Honor.And finally, I would respectfully ask what specific obligation is being asserted against me and how it is being applied in this case.Judge: The obligation is compliance with the law as charged under the statute.Defendant: Understood, Your Honor.My concern is simply that without identifying these foundational elements clearly, any response I provide would be based upon presumption rather than understanding.I am not refusing to proceed. I am requesting clarification so that I may respond accurately within the framework being applied.Judge: Your requests are noted for the record. You still need to enter a plea.Defendant: Understood, Your Honor.For the record, I maintain that I requested clarification regarding the authority, jurisdiction, status, claimant, and obligation associated with this proceeding prior to entering a plea.However, in order to proceed and without waiving those concerns, I enter a plea of not guilty.Judge: Very well. A plea of not guilty will be entered.Defendant: Thank you, Your Honor.(Closing Scene)Now notice what happened here.There was no emotional outburst.No yelling.No argument.No attempt to overpower the court.And equally important—The defendant did not immediately surrender his position through blind assumption.Instead:He remained calm.He attempted to clarify.He preserved the record.And then he proceeded.Now understand this carefully.This does not mean the case is won.It does not mean the judge suddenly agrees.And it does not stop the process.The value is much more practical than that.The defendant maintained composure.He avoided panic.He avoided emotional reaction.And he avoided blindly conceding what he did not understand.That matters.Because most people lose control of themselves long before they lose the case.The Liberty Dialogues is not about magical words or courtroom theatrics.It is about ...
    Show More Show Less
    6 mins
  • How do prosecutors sleep at night?

    How do prosecutors sleep at night?
    May 5 2026

    It is May 5, 2026. Welcome to yestohellwith.com.Over the past series, we have examined the structure of prosecution.We have looked at: incentives, charging decisions, plea bargaining, immunity, courtroom narrative, and the shifting burden of proof.And now we arrive at a necessary conclusion.The role of a prosecutor, in its proper form, is not to secure convictions.It is to seek justice.That means fairness.That means disclosure.That means restraint.That means protecting the integrity of the process… even when it does not favor the State.And if a man or a woman chooses to serve as a prosecutor… as a professional…Then what should we expect?We should expect that, in accordance with their moral makeup… their ethics…They would want to prosecute only those who are truly guilty.We would expect full disclosure.Full discovery.Without delay.Without obfuscation.Without avoidance.We would expect a genuine effort to arrive at the truth—carefully, deliberately, without error.Because this is not just a job.This is a responsibility that affects lives, reputations, and freedom.And if that responsibility is taken seriously—Then the question becomes very simple:Is it too much to expect that a legal professional would adhere to a standard of decency, of fairness, of truth, so that justice is not just claimed… but actually achieved?So that they may rest at night—with peace of mind, with peace of heart—knowing that what was done was right.Let it be so.But what we see, in practice, is something different.Not in every case.But often enough that it cannot be ignored.Because the structure itself creates pressure.Pressure to charge.Pressure to win.Pressure to resolve cases quickly.And under that pressure…The process can begin to shift.From truth to outcome.From evidence to narrative.From fairness to strategy.Now ask yourself this:What is it that the average American fears about the system?It is not the idea of law.It is the perception that once you are inside that system… you are no longer on equal footing.That the case may be shaped long before you ever have the opportunity to be heard.And when that perception becomes widespread—It is no longer just a legal issue.It is a crisis of confidence.Now to be clear—there are prosecutors who take their duty seriously, who act with integrity, who uphold the standard.But the concern is not about individuals.It is about structure.Because when a system consistently produces outcomes that raise questions—the structure must be examined, not defended.And that is where we are.Because the question is no longer theoretical.It is practical.What happens when that structure is applied to a real case?In the next video—we are going to examine exactly that.A real situation.A real prosecution.And we are going to walk through it step by step.Not emotionally.Not reactively.But structurally.So that you can see what is happening… and why.As always—may truth remain supreme.



    Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Show More Show Less
    4 mins
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_c
No reviews yet
In the spirit of reconciliation, Audible acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.